Purported attempt to push back Geneva-2

From www. politico.com

The authoritative Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat says today the Syrian opposition umbrella organization, known as the Syrian National Coalition, is seeking to push back the Geneva-2 peace conference for Syria slated to be held in the Swiss resort of Montreux on January 22.

The paper quotes an SNC source as saying the alliance will be telling its Sunday meeting with the core group of the Friends of Syria – better known as the London 11 – it can only attend the Geneva-2 parley if the conditions set in the Geneva communiqué of June 2012 are met. Chiefly among them is the provision stating: “In all circumstances, the Government must allow immediate and full humanitarian access to humanitarian organizations to all areas affected by the fighting. The Government and all parties must enable the evacuation of the wounded, and all civilians who wish to leave to do so.”

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who accompanied President Francois Hollande on his second state visit to Saudi Arabia a fortnight ago, declared yesterday: “The opposition is right to demand that in parallel to Geneva-2, humanitarian corridors be established and the bombing cease.”

Speaking at a joint press briefing in Paris with his visiting Japanese counterpart, Fabius gave this insight into Geneva-2, translated by France Diplomatie:

Q.: Mr. Fabius, in three days’ time you will host an important meeting on Syria. You said just now that you have discussed this matter with your guests. At a time when the Syrian opposition is tearing itself apart -- they haven’t yet managed to accept or turn down the invitation to attend the Geneva-2 conference -- what can we expect from a conference in which the opposition may not participate?

Regarding Syria, the day before yesterday, I received the invitation from Mr. Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General, to the Geneva conference on January 22 which should take place as follows: On the first day, a meeting will take place in Montreux where we will set out our positions. Then on January 24, there will be a meeting between the Syrian delegations, in the presence of Mr. Brahimi.

Obviously, we support the holding of the Geneva-2 meeting, to the extent that we have always maintained from the outset that the solution be a political one. I would also like to say that if people had listened to France more carefully from the outset, then we probably wouldn’t be in the absolutely tragic situation that we’re in now.

I remember very clearly – it was one of the first times that I received many of my foreign colleagues, just after we took office – the major conference known as the Friends of Syria conference.

At the time we said that Mr. Bashar al-Assad, who UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described as having committed “crimes against humanity,” could not have a role in the future of Syria’s people.

The vision of the future should be built around the moderate opposition.

At the time, in July 2012, there was no Iranian or Hezbollah presence, and there were no terrorist movements. A specific action would have been enough to ensure that developments proceeded as desired but we weren’t heeded. The U.S. elections took place, there was dissent between different groups, and now we find ourselves with an absolutely tragic situation. Thousands of people die every month; there are appalling atrocities.

The number of deaths has now exceeded 130,000. There are millions of displaced persons, with tragic consequences, not just for Syria, a tormented country, but also for Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq.

We need a political solution to address this. In order to find this political solution, we have to engage in discussions – hence Geneva.

The letter that Mr. Ban Ki-moon sent us, which is very well written, states that the goal of the Geneva meeting is to create a transitional government with full executive powers, through discussions between the parties.

The goal of Geneva-2 is to meet, even if it’s not easy, in order to try and build a transitional government with full executive powers, not with Bashar al-Assad but with some elements of the regime and with the moderate opposition. It’s critical because if it doesn’t happen, Bashar al-Assad will say, “If you don’t want the terrorists, support me,” and the terrorists will say, “if you don’t want Bashar al-Assad, support the terrorists.”

We don’t support Mr. Bashar al-Assad, who is guilty of crimes against humanity, or the terrorists. We have to find a solution through dialogue. It’s true that the situation of our moderate opposition coalition friends isn’t easy.

They have to fight on two fronts: on the one hand, there’s Mr. Bashar al-Assad, supported by the Iranians and the Russians; and on the other hand, the terrorist movements. That’s why we’re going to have a meeting on Sunday involving the 11 countries that make up the so-called “Core Group” in the presence of Mr. Ahmad al-Jarba who has just been re-elected as president of the moderate opposition and we will discuss the situation. The moderate opposition will meet again on January 17, following our meeting in Paris.

This is where we are. We believe Geneva-2 -- provided its mandate is fulfilled -- is necessary. We call on all parties to make an effort to participate in the conference, but in accordance with the mandate. If Geneva-2 takes place – as we hope it will – there will be a second difficulty, namely the need to achieve concrete results.

If we want a political solution, we have to talk to each other. At the same time – and this is a request that I reiterate to the international community – we must put an end to the atrocities, to the terrible bombing that’s taking place and address the humanitarian needs.

The opposition is right to demand that, in parallel to Geneva-2, humanitarian corridors be established and the bombing cease.

Can 'friends' keep Syrian National Coalition whole?

The Core Group of the Friends of Syria -- better known as the “London 11” -- will devote their Sunday, January 12, meeting in Paris to sweet-talk Syria’s opposition umbrella organization into attending the Geneva-2 conference.

Reporting today from the French capital for the Saudi newspaper of records Asharq Alawsat, Michel Abu Najm quotes official French sources as saying they are “aware of the threats facing the Syrian National Coalition’s future and are familiar with its sensitive position and the difficulty of choosing between participating or boycotting the Geneva-2 conference.”

Abu Najm also quotes opposition sources as confirming the National Council risks splintering into factions after more than half its 121 members served notice this week they would walk away if the Council opted to sit at the Syria peace table in the Swiss resort of Montreux on January 22 (see my previous post, “The Syrian National Coalition is on its last leg”).

The different factions in the National Coalition were unable to reach an agreement on participation at two days of talks in Istanbul this week and postponed a decision on the issue until January 17.

The Syrian National Council, the main 28-member group in the National Coalition, is threatening to boycott the peace talks unless it has assurances that President Bashar al-Assad will be forced to give up power.

The Syrian government has said it will attend the talks but that Assad's departure is not up for negotiation.

The 11-nation core group of the “Friends of Syria” consists of Britain, Egypt, France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and the United States.

A statement by the Quai d’Orsay says Sunday’s meeting of the London 11 in Paris “will be chaired by Laurent Fabius, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and will take place in the presence of a Syrian National Coalition delegation led by its recently re-elected president, Ahmad al-Jarba.

“This meeting will allow us to reaffirm our full support for the Syrian National Coalition and, in the run-up to the Geneva II conference, to reiterate our shared vision of a political transition addressing the Syrian people’s legitimate aspirations. The creation of a transitional government body with full executive powers is the central objective of the Geneva II conference.

“At a time when the regime’s headlong pursuit of repression against the people continues to aggravate the humanitarian situation, this ministerial meeting will signal our desire to provide increased help to the Syrian National Coalition and the Syrian people, particularly in the liberated areas.”

In context, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon wrote in part in his January 6 invitation letter to participants in the Geneva-2 conference:

…I am now convening the Geneva Conference on Syria, and am pleased to invite you to attend the high-level international meeting that will launch the Conference.

The Conference aims to assist the Syrian parties in ending the violence and achieving a comprehensive agreement for a political settlement, implementing fully the Geneva Communiqué, while preserving the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Syria. The Communiqué contains Principles and Guidelines for a Syrian-led transition. These set out a number of key steps, beginning with agreement on a transitional governing body with full executive powers, formed by mutual consent. As the Geneva Communiqué says, the public services must be preserved or restored. This includes the military forces and security and intelligence services. All governmental institutions and state offices must perform according to professional and human rights standards, operating under a top leadership that inspires public confidence, under the control of the transitional governing body.

The Geneva Conference on Syria will convene under my chairmanship, first in an international high-level format over one day at Montreux, Switzerland, on 22 January 2014, beginning at 9 a.m. Negotiations between the two Syrian parties, facilitated by the Joint Special Representative for Syria, Mr. Lakhdar Brahimi, will follow immediately in Geneva on 24 January 2014. Adjournments and subsequent meetings may take place in accordance with a work plan to be agreed. The high-level international meeting may resume its deliberations as required.

I am confident the international participants who gather in Montreux will offer meaningful support for constructive negotiations between the Syrian parties in Geneva. I am sure that all present will do their utmost to encourage the Syrian parties to reach a comprehensive settlement, fully implementing the Geneva Communiqué, within an accelerated time frame. In addition to participation in the high-level meeting, it may be necessary to call upon you to assist further as the negotiations between the Syrian parties progress.

In inviting the Syrian parties, I have reminded them that the Security Council has called on them to engage seriously and constructively at the Conference, and underscored that they should be broadly representative and committed to the implementation of the Geneva Communiqué and to the achievement of stability and reconciliation. I have also reminded the Syrian parties that, consistent with the Geneva Communiqué as well as Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) and other relevant resolutions (Annex II), full and effective participation of women is essential.

I look forward to confirmation of attendance of your delegation, and the list of delegates and advisers, at your earliest convenience.

Confirmation of attendance will be taken as commitment to the aims of the Conference stated above, in accordance with the Geneva Communiqué, in particular the Principles and Guidelines for a Syrian-led Transition contained in it.

The Office of the Joint Special Representative will provide a technical information note in due course.

The conflict in Syria has raged for too long, and has imposed too many sacrifices on the people of Syria. The Government and all parties must allow immediate and full humanitarian access to all conflict-affected areas. The violence must be ended expeditiously. All attacks against civilians should cease. All parties must work to put an end to all terrorist acts. The Geneva Conference offers a unique avenue towards these ends. I am deeply grateful for your cooperation in this venture, to help ensure that peace can be restored and the transition foreseen in the Geneva Communiqué can be implemented in a way that fully meets the aspirations of the Syrian people…

Hollande, Abdullah set to meet in Rawdat Khoraym

Rawdat Khoraym, a wild life park and oasis 100 kms northeast of Riyadh

French President Francois Hollande flies into Riyadh this afternoon on his second official visit to Saudi Arabia before flying by helicopter to Rawdat Khoraym for talks with King Abdullah.

Rawdat Khoraym, or Khoraym Gardens, is a wild life park and oasis that blooms in the middle of the desert, chiefly in springtime.

Situated some 100 kilometers northeast of Riyadh, Rawdat Khoraym is the King’s favorite retreat.

Hollande told Lebanese journalist Ms Randa Takieddine in an exclusive interview for the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat he will focus in his talks with the monarch on the Iran file and the political solution in Syria.

“Bilateral cooperation between our two countries is consolidating in all fields. France and the Kingdom are partners in working for peace, security and stability in the Middle East.”

Hollande and Abdullah in Riyadh last Novemeber

The French president said he would take up with King Abdullah the world powers’ talks with Iran on its nuclear ambitions and ways of reaching a political solution to the Syria crisis, the need to uphold Lebanon’s stability as well as France’s partnership with the Kingdom in the defense domain.

He reiterated there could be no political solution to the Syria crisis with Bashar al-Assad remaining in power, saying: “Assad is not fighting Muslim extremists. He simply uses them to put pressure on the moderate opposition.”

France, Hollande stressed, continues to coordinate steps with moderate Syrian opposition forces to find a political outcome in Syria.

He hoped the international community would come together at the Geneva-2 Syria peace conference to kickoff a process for a genuine transfer of power in Syria that would preclude the escalation of violence there and in the region.

The French leader strongly condemned Saturday’s car-bomb assassination in Beirut of Lebanon’s former finance minister Mohamad Chatah, an economist who held a senior position at the IMF. Chatah “was a man of dialogue and peace,” he said

Hollande called for the cessation of violence that is threatening Lebanon, saying: “It is vital to respect the country’s constitutional deadlines, particularly the date set for presidential elections” in May.

President Michel Sleiman's mandate runs out on May 25 and there are fears a successor will be hard to find because of huge disagreements between Lebanon's pro- and anti-Syria blocs.

Syrian refugees shame European leaders

This Syrian baby froze to death during the wintry storm "Alexa" chilling the Middle East

European leaders should hang their heads in shame over the pitifully low numbers of refugees from Syria they are prepared to resettle, said Amnesty International.



In a briefing published today, An international failure: The Syrian refugee crisis, the organization details how European Union (EU) member states have only offered to open their doors to around 12,000 of the most vulnerable refugees from Syria: just 0.5 per cent of the 2.3 million people who have fled the country.



“The EU has miserably failed to play its part in providing a safe haven to the refugees who have lost all but their lives. The number of those it’s prepared to resettle is truly pitiful. Across the board European leaders should hang their heads in shame,” said Salil Shetty, Secretary General of Amnesty International.



The closest European capital, Nicosia, lies a mere 200 miles from Damascus. Yet collectively, EU member states have pledged to resettle just a very small proportion of Syria’s most vulnerable refugees. Amnesty International’s briefing breaks down the figures: 


1. Only 10 EU member states offered resettlement or humanitarian admission places to refugees from Syria.
2. Germany is by far the most generous – pledging to take 10,000 refugees or 80 per cent of total EU pledges.
3. Excluding Germany, the remaining 27 EU member states have offered to take a mere 2,340 refugees from Syria.
4. France offered just 500 places or 0.02 per cent of the total number of people who have fled Syria.
5. Spain agreed to take just 30 or 0.001 per cent of refugees from Syria.
6. Eighteen EU member states – including the UK and Italy – offered no places at all.


As winter approaches, conditions for the 2.2 million people who have fled Syria to neighboring countries are deteriorating rapidly.



With only 12,000 places offered by EU member states for resettlement or humanitarian admission, others attempt the journey under their own steam.

Tens of thousands have reached Europe trying to claim asylum having risked life and limb in arduous journeys, on boats or across land. 


Amnesty International’s research reveals that first they have to break through the barricades of Fortress Europe.

Many are faced with violent push backs by police and coastguards, or detained for weeks in deplorable conditions. 


The journey to Italy by sea: 
Hundreds of people die attempting to cross the Mediterranean every year.

In October it is estimated that as many as 650 refugees and migrants died when three boats sank attempting to reach Europe from North Africa. 


More than 10,000 refugees from Syria are reported to have arrived along Italy’s coast in the first 10 months of this year. 


Amnesty International’s briefing gives first-hand accounts of those who have attempted to reach Europe by sea. 


Awad, a 17-year-old boy from Damascus, described how he managed to escape through a window of a sinking boat and swim to the surface. There were reportedly 400 people on board. He saw people clinging to dead bodies and boat wreckage to stay afloat, while others fought over life jackets.

Awad lost his mother as well as other family members. 
  
“I have no idea where my family are… I used to have ambition but now I have lost my mother, I don't want anything, I just want stability, everything else is second to that.” 


Another boy from Syria lost both his father and nine-year-old brother in the accident. 

“My experience didn’t just destroy my dreams; it destroyed my family’s dreams. I am destroyed completely.” 


Fortress Europe: 
In two of the main gateways to the EU, Bulgaria and Greece, refugees from Syria are met with deplorable treatment, including life threatening push-back operations along the Greek coast, and detention for weeks in poor conditions in Bulgaria. 


Greece’s pushback into the sea: 
Refugees have told Amnesty International how Greek police or coastguards, wielding guns and wearing full face hoods, ill-treat them, strip them of their belongings and eventually push them back to Turkey. 

A 32-year-old man from Syria described how the Greek coastguard near the island of Samos confronted him and his mother in October.

They were part of a group of 35 people including women and young children pushed back to Turkey. 

“They put all the men lying on the boat; they stepped on us and hit us with their weapons for three hours. Then at around 10 in the morning, after removing the motor, they put us back to our plastic boat and drove us back to the Turkish waters and left us in the middle of the sea.’’



The number of unlawful pushback operations from Greece is not known; however, Amnesty International believes hundreds have been affected. 

In the last two years the European Commission has provided €228 million to bolster border controls. 

In comparison, for the same time period, just €12 million was allocated to Greece under the European Refugee Fund, which supports efforts in receiving refugees. 


Bulgaria -- detained and contained: 
In Bulgaria, an estimated 5,000 refugees from Syria arrived between January and November 2013. The majority is housed in emergency centers, the largest of which is in the town of Harmanli. It is effectively a closed detention centre. 


Amnesty International found refugees living in squalid conditions in containers, a dilapidated building and in tents. There was a lack of adequate sanitary facilities with limited access to food, bedding or medicine. 

A large number of people was in need of medical care, including some injured in conflict, individuals suffering chronic diseases and those with mental health problems. 

Some of the refugees in Harmanli told Amnesty International they had been detained for over a month.



“Tens of thousands are risking perilous journeys by boat or land to try and reach Europe. We have seen hundreds lose their lives in the Mediterranean. It is deplorable that many of those that who have risked life and limb to get here, are either forced back or detained in truly squalid conditions with insufficient food, water or medical care,” said Salil Shetty.



Europe must act 
“The platitudes of Europe’s leaders ring hollow in the face of the evidence,” said Salil Shetty.

“The EU must open its borders, provide safe passage, and halt these deplorable human rights violations.” 


Just 55,000 Syrian refugees (2.4 per cent of the total number of people who have fled Syria) have managed to get through and claim asylum in the EU. 


For those who manage to break through the barricades of Fortress Europe, many head for Sweden or Germany, which have offered the most help to asylum seekers. In the two years to the end of October 2013, Sweden has received 20,490 new Syrian asylum applications and Germany received 16,100 such applications.

Less than 1,000 people have claimed asylum in each of Greece, Italy and Cyprus. 

Amnesty International is calling on European member states to: 


• Significantly increase the number of resettlement and humanitarian admission places for refugees from Syria;
• Strengthen search and rescue capacity in the Mediterranean to identify boats in distress and assist those on board;
• Ensure that those rescued are treated with dignity and have access to asylum procedures;
• Ensure that unlawful pushback operations are ended;
• Provide legal safe passage for Syrian asylum seekers wishing to travel to European member states.

The EU, its member states, and the international community should continue to provide support to countries hosting the largest numbers of refugees, particularly Jordan and Lebanon.

No longer a Shiite Crescent

Press clipping dated Monday, 13 June 1949

By Jamal Khashoggi, Saudi Arabia’s authoritative political analyst, author and kingpin of the impending Al Arab TV news channel, writing in Arabic today for the mass circulation newspaper al-Hayat

When the term “Shiite Crescent” was coined a few years back, it was meant to warn of Iranian expansionism across the Levant.

Nowadays, after the Big Powers’ defeat in the Qusayr battle, Shiite fundamentalism is basking in all the glory of triumph.

With the resulting enlistment of hundreds of Iraqi Shiite volunteers in the war overtly championed by Iran, the Crescent is liable to evolve into a political axis stretching from Tehran to Beirut via Baghdad and Damascus.

The Iranian Oil Ministry will pull out old maps from its drawers to build the pipeline to pump Iranian oil and gas from Abadan (across Iraq) to Tartus.

The Iranian Ministry of Roads and Transportation will dust off the national railways authority’s blueprints for a new branch line from Tehran to Damascus, and possibly Beirut,

Why not? The wind is blowing in their favor and I am not making a mountain out of a molehill.

Tehran has been mulling and airing such projects for years without actually starting them.

But she will, once she settles the Syria war in her favor. It is only natural for her to consolidate victory on the ground by blending her triumphant axis in a singular political, economic and military network.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader or Guardian Jurist of Iran, will realize his dream of delivering his sermon from the pulpit of Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, announcing the attainment of Islamic unity he has long promised.

He will then pompously step down from the pulpit to stroke the forehead of a wheelchair-bound Damascene boy, signaling that forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.

He will then stand next to a group of Syrian Sunni ulema wearing white turbans. There are lots of them, in the mould of Mufti Ahmad Hassoun, ready to oblige.

He will shake and raise their hands as camera clicks and flashlights capture the historic moment.

The Guardian Jurist will promise that his next prayer – or his successor’s. if he is sufficiently humble – will be in Jerusalem.

But he won’t mention the Golan. He knows the Russians are now the key component of the UN monitoring force separating Israeli and Syrian forces on the Heights.

Because Takfiris are still mounting desperate operations here and there, he realizes that Syrian troops and Hezbollah fighters are busy keeping the peace in predominantly Sunni cities, towns and townships.

In that afternoon, a huge reception will be held in a newly rehabilitated Damascus palace still showing the scars of war to mark the signing of a mutual defense pact by the presidents of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

The Guardian Jurist will stand wreathed in smiles in the background, perhaps in awe at the likely appearance of the Hidden Imam to bless the agreement.

We turn southward to Riyadh and find the capital calm and dusty but concerned the battle was settled in favor of Bashar al-Assad and his partners.

Riyadh is conscious the clean sweep is not Bashar’s but that of Iran and the old Khomeini scheme.

Bashar becomes the representative of Vali e-faqih in Damascus.

Riyadh is also alarmed by Iranian activity in its surrounding area.

It fears for Bahrain. The Houthis have won uncontested control of more than half the old North Yemen. South Yemen, Saudi Arabia’s traditional ally, is being gradually eaten away by Iran.

Gulf unity plans have dissipated. Some Gulf countries are keen to flatter Iran so as to preserve a modicum of their national sovereignty.

The Arab common market and Fertile Crescent idea evaporated and with it the dream of resurrecting the Hejaz Railway that ran from Istanbul to Holy Mecca across Syria and Jordan.

Even the Europeans are buying the Iranian oil flowing through the Abadan-Tartus pipeline. They are also thinking of linking the European Gas Network with its Iranian counterpart. They have forgotten all about sanctions because the world always prefers to deal with winners.

On the Arab Gulf home front, young men are seething. They feel their governments let them down by failing to face up to the Iranian stratagem. The young men are in a sectarian tinderbox and buckling under economic stress. Extremism is rampant and the security services are busy hunting down extremist groups.

A nightmare, don’t you think?

That’s why I believe Saudi Arabia expressly will not allow Iran to win in Syria.

Iranian presence there proved a burden from the day Hafez al-Assad sealed his alliance with Iran’s Islamic Revolution as soon as it took over power 40 years ago.

Whereas the Syrian regime’s muscle under Hafez left a margin of balance and independence in the partnership, his son submitted totally to the Iranians and Hezbollah.

It is thanks to them Bashar is still alive and ruling a country in ruin. Instead of being their partner, he has become their subordinate.

The implication is that Iran’s presence in Lebanon and Syria now constitutes a clear threat to Saudi Arabia’s national security, and Turkey’s as well.

Consequently, Saudi Arabia must do something now, albeit alone. The kingdom’s security is at stake.

It will be good if the United States joined an alliance led by Saudi Arabia to bring down Bashar and return Syria to the Arab fold. But this should not be a precondition to proceed.

Let Saudi Arabia head those on board.

Let us put aside any misgivings about sequels of the Arab Spring, the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey’s ambitions.

Let the objective be to bring down Assad fast.

The objective is bound to draw together multiple forces ranging from the Anbar tribes to Hamas to Egypt’s Brothers to Tunisia to the Gulf Countries.

That would entice Turkey to partake in the alliance. France could follow. And whether the United States does or does not breeze in is inconsequential. After all, it’s our battle and our security. U.S. security is not on the line. 

The West’s appeasement of Iran

This is an edited translation of excerpts from the weekly think piece of leading American-Lebanese journalist Raghida Dergham for this morning’s edition of the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat:

The West’s ambiguous attitudes towards the Islamic Republic of Iran raise many questions.

For instance, is the collective objective of the United States, Britain and France to allow Iran to thwart a Syrian Opposition victory in Syria?

Or, is their shared aim to push Iran and Hezbollah deeper into the Syria quagmire?

The West is also out to lunch in the run-up to next month’s presidential election in Iran. It chose to get some shuteye when it was supposed to be exposing the establishment’s increasing dogmatism. That’s what the West did in Iran’s 10^th presidential election in 2009, before the reformist movement was crushed.

Unlike in 2009, when it encouraged Iran’s reformist movement, the West made nothing this week when the Guardian Council, a body of theologians and jurists, disqualified reformist ex-President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani from running and approved only eight conservative candidates to stand for president.

In their on-off nuclear negotiations for a decade, the West continues to give Iran elbowroom to press ahead with its most contentious nuclear work. Here too, the West comes across as appeasing the Mullahs.

As to the regional role to which Tehran lays claim, the West seems content to play a double role. On the one hand, the West appears to give Iran free rein in the Arab countries it covets, chiefly Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

At the same time, Washington, London and Paris give the impression of being pleased to see Sunnis and Shiites crossing swords in Syria’s war of attrition, thus keeping both sides at bay from their cities.

Public acknowledgement of the presence of Iranian forces in Syria leaves the West in a quandary. A UN Security Council resolution (Resolution 1747 of 24 March 2007) bars arms exports by Iran under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

In paragraph 5 of the said resolution, the UN Security Council “Decides that Iran shall not supply, sell or transfer directly or indirectly from its territory or by its nationals or using its flag vessels or aircraft any arms or related materiel…”

Would the West be invoking the breach anytime soon?

The West explicitly warned Hezbollah recently against intervening militarily in Syria. And as a response to the group’s joining the war on the side of Assad’s regime, Europe is hinting it “might” designate Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist entity.

The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted this week to pass a bill that will be highly unpopular in Moscow, let alone Damascus.

The “Syrian Transition Support Act” would provide arms to Syrian rebels in support of a regime change.

The bill heads first to the Senate, then to the House and finally to the president.

If the bill is passed, will President Barack Obama sign it?

So far, his policy has been to prevent a victory in Syria either by the armed opposition, which includes not more than five or 10 percent from Jabhat al-Nusra, or by the Iran-Hezbollah-Russia triumvirate.

As usual, Britain and France continue to warn on Syria, only to backtrack later. Both have been talking for months about arming the opposition, even at the cost of busting the European Union arms embargo, only to put their moves on hold afterward.

Are Britain and France acquiescing to the war of exhaustion and attrition in Syria, to help their intelligence services -- and the West generally – gather invaluable information on Sunni extremists belonging to al-Qaeda, Jabhat al-Nusra and the likes?

By flying to Amman this week for the “Friends of Syria” core group meeting, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry looked more like Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s Geneva-2 salesman.

Whereas Washington was previously calling on Assad to stand down, the Amman closing statement simply said Assad “cannot play a role in the future of Syria.”

Russia wants Iran to be in Geneva-2. And the United States has yet to say no. All Washington said this week in a background briefing on Kerry’s trip to Amman was, “We’ll certainly have to talk to the Russians more, and we’ll have to talk also to the United Nations because they very well will have a big role. So the final attendance list is still under discussion.”

The now-defunct Soviet Union spent decades trying to reach the warm waters of the Mediterranean. Russia reached them via Tartus. Iran is already there via Hezbollah in Lebanon.

All these intertwined elements warrant a rethink. Talk of the Syria war being a quagmire or a Vietnam hemorrhaging Iran and Hezbollah is offset by whispers of a behind-the-scenes grand bargain whereby West and East hand Iran victory in her Vietnam war against Sunni extremists in Syria, plus a say in the regional balance of forces.

Obama still dithers as Syria withers

Cartoon by Patrick Chappatte

I chose this cartoon (right) because I doubt Barack Obama would ever lift a finger against Bashar al-Assad.

The U.S. president will keep dithering, even if Iran produced “the bomb” and nuked a city held by the Syrian president’s opponents.

I reached this conclusion after reading, scrutinizing and pondering Obama’s remarks in the Oval Office going into his bilateral meeting with Jordan’s King Abdullah.

When strong evidence emerged earlier this year that Assad forces were moving chemical weapons, the White House insisted the action did not cross the line Obama set. By “move” the weapons, a White House spokesman said, Obama meant transferring them to a terror group, like Hezbollah.

After the British and French governments wrote to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon saying they had evidence of chemical use in Syria, Obama had his secretary of state and defense secretary say separately the intelligence regarding the attacks remained inconclusive.

Hardly four weeks after Obama’s March visit to Israel, where he said proof of chemical weapons use would be a “game changer,” Israel’s senior military intelligence analyst said the Assad regime had repeatedly used chemical weapons in the last month, and criticized the international community for failing to respond.

With the mounting evidence forcing Obama’s hand, the White House found nothing better in midweek than write letters to congressmen saying, “"Our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin.”

But the letters added: "Given the stakes involved, and what we have learned from our own recent experiences, intelligence assessments alone are not sufficient -- only credible and corroborated facts that provide us with some degree of certainty will guide our decision-making."

This gets us to last night’s round of dilly-dallying by Obama in the presence of King Abdullah.

The full transcript:

THE PRESIDENT:  I want to welcome to the Oval Office once again King Abdullah.  His Majesty is a great friend of the United States.  Jordan is a great partner to the United States on a whole host of issues.  And obviously, although we just recently saw each other -- and I want to thank again His Majesty for the extraordinary hospitality that he showed during our visit -- there remain a host of very urgent issues in the region that we’re going to have an opportunity to discuss.

First of all, I want to congratulate His Majesty on a series of reforms that he’s initiating inside of Jordan, and we want to find out how we can continue to be supportive and helpful in creating greater economic opportunity and prosperity in the area.

We have been supportive with respect to loan guarantees and other efforts, in part because we’ve also seen King Abdullah take some very important steps to further open democratization and entrepreneurship and economic development inside of Jordan.  We want to encourage that because we think Jordan can be an extraordinary model for effective governance in the region.

We’re also going to have an opportunity to talk about the Middle East peace process.  And the last time I saw King Abdullah, I’d just come out of Israel and the West Bank in consultations with Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas. And Jordan, like the United States, has an enormous stake in peace.  And we do think that there’s a window of opportunity that needs to be seized, and so we will both consult in how we can jumpstart serious conversations that could lead to a peaceful settlement and both a secure Israel with normalized relations with its neighbors and a Palestinian state that was sovereign.

Of great urgency right now obviously is the situation in Syria.  Jordan has experienced a huge influx of refugees coming into the country from Syria, people who’ve been displaced.  Jordan historically has maintained open borders and allowed these refugees on a humanitarian basis to come in, but it’s an enormous strain on a small country.  And we are mobilizing international support to help with these refugees, but obviously our goal is to create a stable Syria, where civilians are not at risk. 

And we both agree that at this point, President Assad has lost legitimacy and that we need to find a political transition that allows a multi-sect, democratic transition to take place so that Syria can be a place where all people can live in peace and harmony.

This will be difficult to accomplish.  And yesterday, some of you saw that I asked my people to brief Congress about the fact that we now have some evidence that chemical weapons have been used on the populations in Syria.  Now, these are preliminary assessments; they’re based on our intelligence gathering.  We have varying degrees of confidence about the actual use, but there are a range of questions around how, when, where these weapons may have been used. 

So we’re going to be pursuing a very vigorous investigation ourselves, and we’re going to be consulting with our partners in the region as well as the international community and the United Nations to make sure that we are investigating this as effectively and as quickly as we can.

But I meant what I’d said, and I will repeat that it’s, obviously, horrific as it is when mortars are being fired on civilians and people are being indiscriminately killed.  To use potential weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations crosses another line with respect to international norms and international law.  And that is going to be a game changer. 

We have to act prudently.  We have to make these assessments deliberately.  But I think all of us, not just in the United States but around the world, recognize how we cannot stand by and permit the systematic use of weapons like chemical weapons on civilian populations. 

So this is going to be something that we’ll be paying a lot of attention to -- trying to confirm, and mobilize the international community around those issues.

But in everything that we do, we very much appreciate the kinds of support, advice, counsel, and partnership that we have with His Majesty and the people of Jordan.  And we look forward to a fruitful consultation this afternoon.

HIS MAJESTY KING ABDULLAH:  Mr. President, thank you very much.  We’re delighted to be back here again.  And may I first start off by expressing, on behalf of myself and the delegation and people of Jordan, our heartfelt condolences on the tremendous tragedies both in Boston for the bombings, as well as that of Texas -- especially that of Boston.  We've always stood together in our fight against terrorism, and this is an issue that we will always be strong partners there.

As you've mentioned, sir, on the issue of the peace process, when you were in Jordan, we had mentioned this is the homework stage.  Jordan will continue to work very closely with the Israelis and the Palestinians, obviously with our American allies to see how we can bring both sides closer together.

But one of the major concerns that brings us here to Washington together, as you alluded to, is obviously the challenge with Syria, the fragmentation of Syrian society, which is becoming more and more alarming. 

Since your last visit to Jordan five weeks ago, we've had over 60,000 refugees -- up to over half a million, so we're at 10 percent of an increase of our population.  We're so grateful to the support that you and the American people have given to our country.  You couldn’t do more, quite honestly, and we're so grateful.  I just wanted to express our appreciation on behalf of myself and the Jordanian people for that.

I think, sir, that we are both working very hard to look for a political solution for a Syria that is one that is, as you mentioned, inclusive so that we're bringing everybody together, which is sort of our last hope to -- as we're now seeing the surge of the second threat appear, which is that of militant terrorist organizations that have risen over the past several months.

But I am confident, with your leadership and with meetings that we will have today, that we can find a mechanism to bring a solution -- to an end as quickly as possible. 

Lastly, sir, you had the Crown Prince of the United Arab Emirates, Mohammed bin Zayed, who is one of our strongest strategic allies.  And I know that is his position with the United States, as well as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia -- the three of us are working very hard in cooperation with the United States to try to find a quick and just solution to the Syrian crisis. 

So I look forward to our discussions later this afternoon, and I hope that together we will be able to alleviate the suffering.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Okay. 

Q. Mr. President, why has the red line been crossed --

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  You guys all have the same question?

Q. Yes.

Q. You know that they are --

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Hold on a second, miss --  one at a time. 

What we have right now is an intelligence assessment.  And as I said, knowing that potentially chemical weapons have been used inside of Syria doesn’t tell us when they were used, how they were used.  Obtaining confirmation and strong evidence, all of those things we have to make sure that we work on with the international community.  And we ourselves are going to be putting a lot of resources into focusing on this. 

And I think that, in many ways, a line has been crossed when we see tens of thousands of innocent people being killed by a regime.  But the use of chemical weapons and the dangers that poses to the international community, to neighbors of Syria, the potential for chemical weapons to get into the hands of terrorists -- all of those things add increased urgency to what is already a significant security problem and humanitarian problem in the region. 

So we're going to be working with countries like Jordan to try to obtain more direct evidence and confirmation of this potential use.  In the meantime, I've been very clear publicly, but also privately, that for the Syrian government to utilize chemical weapons on its people crosses a line that will change my calculus and how the United States approaches these issues. 

So this is not an on or off switch.  This is an ongoing challenge that all of us have to be concerned about.  And we're going to be working with the international community and our partners to keep our eyes on what's happening on the ground, to gather any evidence of potential chemical weapon use and, at the same time, to continue to help with a moderate and inclusive opposition to help bring about the day when the Syrian people can once again focus on living their lives, raising their children, starting businesses, and obtaining basic freedom and human rights. 

This is going to be a long-term proposition.  This is not going to be something that is solved easily overnight.  But I know that King Abdullah is committed to trying to find these kinds of solutions.  So am I. 

Thank you everybody.