Syria: Low blow to Assad
FROM THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT
The Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, has suffered further damage to his already threadbare international credibility following the scathing criticisms of his regime voiced by the former vice-president, Abdel-Halim Khaddam. The Khaddam revelations, aired during a lengthy interview conducted in Paris with the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television station, signal a new phase in the drive to hold the Syrian regime to account for its presumed role in the assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafiq Hariri, in February 2005. The main question now is whether the international community--including the most powerful Arab states--has reached the point at which it is ready to abandon all pretence of dealing with the matter in consultation with the Syrian authorities, and is prepared to move into a mode of overt confrontation.
Mr Khaddam claimed in the interview that he was in Paris because he wished to write his memoirs away from the distractions of a politically turbulent Damascus. His role in active politics came to an end in June 2005, when he was voted off the regional command of the ruling Baath party. He also said that members of his family were in France on vacation, and that he and they fully intended to return. This was clearly intended to counter any suggestions that he was speaking as a political exile seeking to undermine the regime on behalf of foreign powers--precisely the charge that has subsequently been levelled at him.
Mr Khaddam also sought to present himself as being a proponent of reform since Mr Assad assumed power in 2000, on the death of his father, Hafez al-Assad (a close political colleague of Mr Khaddam since the 1960s). He said that the contrary view that Mr Assad had sought to enact reforms but had been blocked by the "old guard", including Mr Khaddam, was a fiction peddled by the Syrian security services.
Bashar's failings
Mr Khaddam attributed the failure of the reform effort to the monopolisation of power by Mr Assad and his close circle of relatives and advisers, to the faulty reading of current political events by Mr Assad and this circle, and to the tendency of Mr Assad to react to events in an emotional manner. Mr Khaddam said that Mr Assad and his foreign minister, Farouq al-Shara, had woefully misread signals from the US following the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and had wrongly supposed that Syria had latitude to bargain over its co-operation with the US on Iraqi security issues and that the Bush administration was too involved in Iraq to care about what Syria did in Lebanon.
Mr Khaddam added his testimony to that of other officials cited in the reports of the UN investigator, Detlev Mehlis, as saying that Mr Assad had personally threatened Mr Hariri during meetings to discuss the question of extending the term of the Lebanese president, Emile Lahoud. He also said that he had told Mr Assad repeatedly that the head of Syrian military intelligence in Lebanon, Rustom Ghazali, was unfit for that job. (Mr Khaddam further alleged that Mr Ghazali had been implicated in a major scandal at a Lebanese bank.) He claimed that Mr Assad had pledged to deal with Mr Ghazali, but had failed to act. Mr Ghazali is thought to be one of the five Syrian officials interviewed by Mr Mehlis in Vienna in early December as a suspect in the Hariri assassination--the officials were not named in the report subsequently presented by Mr Mehlis to the UN Security Council.
Mr Khaddam did not offer any conclusive opinion on who may have been responsible for the assassination. However, he insisted that the operation was of such a scale that it had to have been done by a state agency, and that no such agency would have acted without political approval from the highest level.
"Traitor"
Mr Khaddam's remarks prompted heated reactions in Damascus. The government has been urged by the Syrian parliament to charge the former vice-president with high treason, and the state-owned media have published extensive reports alleging that Mr Khaddam has amassed enormous wealth through using his political influence, particularly in Lebanon, to cut advantageous business deals for himself and his children. By blackening Mr Khaddam's name, the Syrian regime is clearly seeking to shore up its internal front against what is presented as a US-inspired onslaught on a country standing firm in defence of Arab and Islamic rights and principles.
Mr Khaddam's statements are nevertheless a serious blow. His intervention comes after the Assad regime had appeared to be making some headway in its dealings with the UN investigation into the Hariri affair. Mr Mehlis himself has stepped down, handing over to Serge Brammertz, a Belgian serving as deputy prosecutor at the International Criminal Court in the The Hague, suggesting that the investigation still has some way to go before a solid prosecution case can be presented. Mr Assad can also draw some satisfaction from the rising political tensions in Lebanon itself and from the tenacity of Mr Lahoud in continuing to hold on to the presidency. However, Mr Khaddam's decision to go on the record with specific allegations against Mr Assad means that the UN commission is now likely to request an interview with the Syrian president to corroborate these statements. The Syrian government maintains that it will co-operate with the commission as long as Syrian sovereignty is respected--making clear that involving the head of state in the investigation would be a step too far.
Arab quandary
Mr Assad's predicament puts his fellow Arab leaders in a difficult position. The Syrian leader has looked to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the two most powerful Arab states, for support and advice. Both have urged him to do everything that the UN asks of him. For Saudi Arabia, the matter has special importance, as Mr Hariri held Saudi nationality (Mr Khaddam's sons are also said to have Saudi passports). Egypt's interest is more to do with Cairo's traditional role as the leader of the Arab world. In the event of an open breach between Syria and the UN, the Arab states will have to choose on which side they stand. The most likely first step from the UN would be sanctions, including a travel ban for leading Syrian officials. For the Arab states the question then would be whether to accept that another of their fellow Arab League members--after Iraq and Libya--was in line for a prolonged period of isolation, or whether to become actively involved in promoting an alternative to a possibly doomed regime.
SOURCE: ViewsWire Middle East
The Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, has suffered further damage to his already threadbare international credibility following the scathing criticisms of his regime voiced by the former vice-president, Abdel-Halim Khaddam. The Khaddam revelations, aired during a lengthy interview conducted in Paris with the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television station, signal a new phase in the drive to hold the Syrian regime to account for its presumed role in the assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafiq Hariri, in February 2005. The main question now is whether the international community--including the most powerful Arab states--has reached the point at which it is ready to abandon all pretence of dealing with the matter in consultation with the Syrian authorities, and is prepared to move into a mode of overt confrontation.
Mr Khaddam claimed in the interview that he was in Paris because he wished to write his memoirs away from the distractions of a politically turbulent Damascus. His role in active politics came to an end in June 2005, when he was voted off the regional command of the ruling Baath party. He also said that members of his family were in France on vacation, and that he and they fully intended to return. This was clearly intended to counter any suggestions that he was speaking as a political exile seeking to undermine the regime on behalf of foreign powers--precisely the charge that has subsequently been levelled at him.
Mr Khaddam also sought to present himself as being a proponent of reform since Mr Assad assumed power in 2000, on the death of his father, Hafez al-Assad (a close political colleague of Mr Khaddam since the 1960s). He said that the contrary view that Mr Assad had sought to enact reforms but had been blocked by the "old guard", including Mr Khaddam, was a fiction peddled by the Syrian security services.
Bashar's failings
Mr Khaddam attributed the failure of the reform effort to the monopolisation of power by Mr Assad and his close circle of relatives and advisers, to the faulty reading of current political events by Mr Assad and this circle, and to the tendency of Mr Assad to react to events in an emotional manner. Mr Khaddam said that Mr Assad and his foreign minister, Farouq al-Shara, had woefully misread signals from the US following the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and had wrongly supposed that Syria had latitude to bargain over its co-operation with the US on Iraqi security issues and that the Bush administration was too involved in Iraq to care about what Syria did in Lebanon.
Mr Khaddam added his testimony to that of other officials cited in the reports of the UN investigator, Detlev Mehlis, as saying that Mr Assad had personally threatened Mr Hariri during meetings to discuss the question of extending the term of the Lebanese president, Emile Lahoud. He also said that he had told Mr Assad repeatedly that the head of Syrian military intelligence in Lebanon, Rustom Ghazali, was unfit for that job. (Mr Khaddam further alleged that Mr Ghazali had been implicated in a major scandal at a Lebanese bank.) He claimed that Mr Assad had pledged to deal with Mr Ghazali, but had failed to act. Mr Ghazali is thought to be one of the five Syrian officials interviewed by Mr Mehlis in Vienna in early December as a suspect in the Hariri assassination--the officials were not named in the report subsequently presented by Mr Mehlis to the UN Security Council.
Mr Khaddam did not offer any conclusive opinion on who may have been responsible for the assassination. However, he insisted that the operation was of such a scale that it had to have been done by a state agency, and that no such agency would have acted without political approval from the highest level.
"Traitor"
Mr Khaddam's remarks prompted heated reactions in Damascus. The government has been urged by the Syrian parliament to charge the former vice-president with high treason, and the state-owned media have published extensive reports alleging that Mr Khaddam has amassed enormous wealth through using his political influence, particularly in Lebanon, to cut advantageous business deals for himself and his children. By blackening Mr Khaddam's name, the Syrian regime is clearly seeking to shore up its internal front against what is presented as a US-inspired onslaught on a country standing firm in defence of Arab and Islamic rights and principles.
Mr Khaddam's statements are nevertheless a serious blow. His intervention comes after the Assad regime had appeared to be making some headway in its dealings with the UN investigation into the Hariri affair. Mr Mehlis himself has stepped down, handing over to Serge Brammertz, a Belgian serving as deputy prosecutor at the International Criminal Court in the The Hague, suggesting that the investigation still has some way to go before a solid prosecution case can be presented. Mr Assad can also draw some satisfaction from the rising political tensions in Lebanon itself and from the tenacity of Mr Lahoud in continuing to hold on to the presidency. However, Mr Khaddam's decision to go on the record with specific allegations against Mr Assad means that the UN commission is now likely to request an interview with the Syrian president to corroborate these statements. The Syrian government maintains that it will co-operate with the commission as long as Syrian sovereignty is respected--making clear that involving the head of state in the investigation would be a step too far.
Arab quandary
Mr Assad's predicament puts his fellow Arab leaders in a difficult position. The Syrian leader has looked to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the two most powerful Arab states, for support and advice. Both have urged him to do everything that the UN asks of him. For Saudi Arabia, the matter has special importance, as Mr Hariri held Saudi nationality (Mr Khaddam's sons are also said to have Saudi passports). Egypt's interest is more to do with Cairo's traditional role as the leader of the Arab world. In the event of an open breach between Syria and the UN, the Arab states will have to choose on which side they stand. The most likely first step from the UN would be sanctions, including a travel ban for leading Syrian officials. For the Arab states the question then would be whether to accept that another of their fellow Arab League members--after Iraq and Libya--was in line for a prolonged period of isolation, or whether to become actively involved in promoting an alternative to a possibly doomed regime.
SOURCE: ViewsWire Middle East
posted by Marko at 1/03/2006 11:47:00 AM
<< Home