THE COMING CHANGE

AMERICA'S MIDEAST POLICY AND SYRIA

October 2002

The multi-pronged offensive against the opposition has little to do with issues raised or whom they were raised with. The Syrians are scared of the coming changes in the region and are scrambling to find a place for themselves. They simply do not want any viable Lebanese block capable of leading the country. As long as the opposition was fragmented and limited to complaining from outside the system, it was not a threat. Now it is, mainly because it represents an alternative to Syria’s rule should international circumstances turn, and turn they will.  

That is what the Syrians are fighting. They do not want to leave any opening in Lebanon that can be used against them. They are simultaneously trying to fragment, discredit and eliminate the opposition. The “Consultative Group”, new election law, accusations of collusion with Israel and the US and legal cases are all part of it.  

Bush is on a warpath, insisting that Iraq must be disarmed and the regime changed, because it is a threat to the whole world. Regardless of the accuracy of the Iraqi weapons capabilities, this is NOT THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. 

What is driving US policy is control of as much of the world’s oil supply and the Middle East’s critical water supply as possible. They are looking to have direct access to the oil of central Asia that would insure they are not reliant on any one country. Iraq is militarily deemed as the most effective starting point and was assumed to be the easiest to convince the world of. But, it will not end with Iraq. A change in regimes in both Iran and Syria will follow or even proceed before the dust settles in Iraq. The US wants a contiguous land route from the Mediterranean to the Caspian Sea ruled by friendly regimes. That would create a third alternative to the Afghan/Pakistan route and the Russian route for getting central Asian oil to the world markets. The Turkish route is far too expensive. 

Direct and indirect control of the oil reserves of Iraq, Iran and the Caspian basin will further weaken or even dissolve OPEC and end US dependence on Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Iraq also sits amidst more than half the region’s water resources. The Euphrates/ Tigris basin extends into Syria, Iran and Turkey, but is primarily in Iraq. The second largest basin is in and around Lebanon. 

That is the objective, and when the only super power aims for something, it will get it, regardless of the bravado of the Hizbullahis of this world. 

The Alawites are trying to sell the same old bag of goods, offering to control the fundamentalists and prevent them from igniting the whole region. Aside from being a clear admission that they are the true terror masters with the ability to leash or unleash terror at will, this formula may at best have a few more weeks to live before it comes to final death. September 11 and the last two years in Israel have shown that “controlled terrorists” are the worse kind. Controlled action means controlled response and a lot of time to grow stronger and more effective, when they finally act. They now want them gone, not controlled. 

The few weeks will keep Syria on the side lines long enough to finish the initial strikes on Iraq or until they figure they do not have UN cover for going directly to Iraq. Should the likes of Russia, France and China remain opposed to a war on Iraq and prevent direct UN cover, a conflict can start in South Lebanon and head east. That is the reason a minor 4-inch pipe on the Wazani has become such a major issue. It will be a convenient spark that is used to claim Syrian mobilization to strike Syria and then claim Iraq supportive action and keep moving. This is more dangerous, as the US believes Iraq has more harmful weapons, which if not taken out first could inflict a lot of damage. However, it will not stop them. 

The rest of the Arab leaders will be so happy not to be in America’s crosshairs that they will turn their meager military resources against their own people to subdue public demonstration and insure their own survival. The whole world knows this. 

Is it any wonder the Syrians are scared? They know a storm is coming, but they are not sure when or how it will hit them. What happens in Lebanon is critical.  

The Saudis and company will certainly try to retain relevance and use the Sunnis in Lebanon and Syria to keep it. The Saudis could simultaneously activate their fundamentalist and moderate friends in both countries. They will then argue that putting moderate Muslims in power is the best way to end fundamentalism, which they will guarantee. They would need the Syrians to weaken the Christian presence and leave only the Alawites and Sunnis in the game. This may explain Hariri’s almost total silence so far, and may be giving the Syrians a push. 

However, since 9/11, the Americans no longer believe in this formula either. The Saudis are held responsible as the main financiers and defenders of these groups over the years. And, this again brings the “controlled terrorists” into play. 

Of course the Israelis have their own objectives that they will try to achieve before the dust settles, which brings us to the Syria Accountability Act. The Israelis threw some weight behind it, but not enough to pass. Yet. They want a sword over Syria’s head to keep it on the sidelines until its time comes, but do not want to scare the Syrians into immediately siding with Iraq.  

The Israelis are at least looking to secure their own water resources and settle the Palestinian issue. A massive reshuffle in the region that leaves the “Arab League almost non-existent with the Syrian/Iraqi/Iranian armies neutralized will allow them to do both. They do as they wish with the Palestinians without any Arab uproar in their immediate vicinity. And, they can permanently keep the Golan with all its water. This would explain Israel’s eagerness for war even when it is almost certain it will suffer massive casualties. Long-term survival is what they are looking for.  

In response to all this, the Syrians are sending their own message to the Lebanese Christians telling them their only chance for survival is through the Alawites. But, is it? 

In fact, the exact opposite is true. The Alawite’s survival depends on us. Christians, specially when counting those in Syria and Iraq are much more numerous and a much more effective counterweight to the Muslims, whom the West no longer trust. They no longer seek to appease them or sacrifice their friends for them. With the coming changes, the Americans will become even less considerate of what the “Arabs” think.  

Basically, by attacking us, the Alawites are setting the stage for their own fall. Maybe the Saudi’s and local Sunnis are pushing them in that direction. Or, maybe they are counting on Israel to support them against Saudi influence. Or, they believe Israel will not accept a Christian presence that would compete with it. That was then. Today, Israel is sinking fast and if fundamentalism is not stopped, its future is dire. Anything is better than this. The Israelis are looking at their water aquifers to run dry in three years. And, this year marks the first time Israel has had negative immigration and investment. The Alawite “control” of the terrorists is effectively killing them.  

Like Lebanon, Syria and Iraq are mixed countries that can have a democratic power sharing system. The US “Democratization” program is basically aimed at them. Minority ruled dictatorships that the US has supported all these years have proven to be disastrous, as they have also resorted to supporting terrorism to protect themselves. Power sharing that includes enough minorities and moderate Moslems will ensure stability, as it does not need to protect itself from the people it represents. 

How long it would take to bring Iraq and Syria into the democratic world is any body’s guess. But, the US will not be in a hurry. The longer it takes, the longer they will be needed there to help guide them and help them rebuild their countries.  

As for what we should do at this juncture? We should take the Interior Minister’s advice and “spearhead” the effort for change in Lebanon. We should put forth a complete political program detailing our vision of the future Lebanon. The plan should include everything: power sharing, election laws, administrative decentralization, Economics, Cultural, Lebanon’s relations with Syria the Arab world and others, etc. And, yes maybe a new constitution that is more reflective of Lebanon, than Syria and Saudi Arabia. We do not need to state Lebanon’s “identity” in the constitution. LEBANON IS AN IDENTITY. Giving it another identity is insulting and demeaning.  

This kind of political platform will undermine any offensive against us and will greatly improve our position after the conflict subsides, as the West will find people who already know democracy and have a plan, as opposed to those who need to be taught the meaning of freedom. It will also remove any misunderstanding or personal barriers to allow as many of the Lebanese who really believe in a free democratic, just and prosperous country to adopt or debate the principles.

We are looking at a new regional geopolitical structure in the making. We are best positioned to play a major role in helping the West democratize the region and rebuild it. We understand the mentality and needs of the people as well as the intricacies of bridging the differences between various minorities. Lebanon can serve as the training ground for Syrian and Iraqi democratization and a bridge between Western and Middle Eastern culture. We should not be caught in the details of today and miss this opportunity. 

 Ziad Nassar