“No peace in Syria or region with Assad in power”

Paris Declaration of the Core Group

Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Coalition's A. Jarba and French Foreign Minister  L. Fabius

We, the Foreign Ministers of Egypt, France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States, met today in Paris with a delegation of the Syrian National Coalition led by its president Ahmad al-Jarba, and adopted the following Core Group declaration:

1. We support the rights of the Syrian people to determine its own destiny and to defend itself against oppression. The Geneva II Conference, based on the full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, is aiming at allowing the Syrian people to control its future and put an end to the current despotic regime through a genuine political transition.

2. We condemn in the strongest terms the atrocities committed on a daily basis by the regime against its own people, with the support of Hezbollah and other foreign groups. We express outrage notably at the intensive use of “barrel bombs” against the population of the city of Aleppo, which have left over 700 dead and 3,000 injured since December 15, and in several other locations throughout Syria. We are revolted by the “starve or surrender” strategy used by the regime, which in particular deprives of food and medicine more than 200,000 people in the suburbs of Damascus and in the old city of Homs. We recall that any strategy to starve civilians constitutes a war crime. The international community should not be expected to tolerate the continuation of such crimes.

3. The increased fuelling, by the regime, of the suffering of the Syrian people gravely undermines the prospect of success of the Geneva II Conference. The regime must fulfill its obligations set out by UN Security Council Resolutions 2042 and 2043 which it formally accepted and, in particular, must immediately put an end to its indiscriminate attacks against civilians and release all arbitrarily detained persons. It must allow immediate and unfettered humanitarian access to the entirety of the Syrian territory, through cross line and cross border operations. We urge Russia and Iran to use all their influence on the regime to act accordingly. We deplore that the UN Security Council could not express itself since the 2 October Presidential Statement. Considering that the situation is still deteriorating, we call for a humanitarian resolution from the UN Security Council.

4. We reiterate our conviction that the only solution to the conflict is a genuine political transition, based on the full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué, and preserving the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian State.

5. We welcome the invitation sent by the UN Secretary General, which convenes the parties to a Geneva II Conference to fully implement the Geneva Communiqué, with the priority aim of forming, by mutual consent, a transitional governing body (TGB) with full executive powers. We recall that the invitation clearly states that participating in the Conference will be taken as a commitment to this aim.

6. We therefore strongly condemn the latest statements of the regime, by which it refused to come to Geneva to establish a political transition. These statements fully contradict the Geneva Communiqué, endorsed by the UN Security Council Resolution 2118, to which the regime must commit. In addition, the perspective of a presidential election organized by the regime, in which Bashar al-Assad would run, also fully contradicts the Geneva II process and its goal of a negotiated democratic transition. Such a parody of a ballot, aimed at maintaining in power a man whom the UN considers committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, would only fuel the conflict and increase the threat of a partition of the country. If it were to happen, we would consider it totally null and void.

7. We reaffirm our full commitment to the text of the Core Group Ministerial Communiqué of 22 October 2013. Negotiations to form the TGB, under the mediation of the Joint Special Representative, must start as early as January 24 and must not be open-ended. The Geneva II process must lead to tangible and immediate benefits to the Syrian people. During the course of negotiations, all parties must put an end to the use of heavy weapons and implement humanitarian pauses. As of the establishment of the TGB, all parties must cooperate with the TGB in ensuring the permanent cessation of violence throughout the country. Consistent with the Geneva Communiqué, once the TGB is established, with control over all governmental institutions, as specified in the UNSG invitation letter, including the armed forces, security services and intelligence structures, Assad and his close associates with blood on their hands will have no role in Syria.

8. All those who committed war crimes or crimes against humanity must be held accountable. We reaffirm our support to international criminal justice mechanisms to achieve reconciliation, truth and accountability for gross violations, as well as effective remedies and reparations for victims.

9. We urge the National Coalition to respond positively to the invitation to set up the Syrian opposition delegation sent by the UN Secretary General. We invite them to form, as soon as possible, a delegation of opposition forces to participate in the political process starting on January 22. As the legitimate representative of the Syrian people, the National Coalition should establish a delegation reflecting the diversity of the Syrian society and be gender balanced. We pledge our full backing to the opposition during the Geneva II Conference.

10. We strongly support the vision envisaged by the National Covenant adopted in Cairo paving the way for a democratic and pluralistic Syria.

11. We welcome the Kuwaiti initiative to host the Second International Humanitarian Pledging Conference for Syria on 15 January. We call on all countries to mobilize financial resources to respond to the needs inside Syria, including in the liberated, contested and besieged areas, and in the countries of the region generously hosting a growing number of refugees. We recognize the enormous social, economic and financial impact these refugees have on their societies, and call upon the international community to assume its responsibility through burden sharing. We also welcome the UNHCR and neighboring country meeting to be held in Urfa – Turkey – on 17 January to highlight increasing pressure on host governments and communities, as a result of hosting more than 2.5 million refugees from Syria. We stress the importance of meeting the needs of the internally displaced persons concentrated in certain areas who seek refuge and protection. It is crucial to increase the level of humanitarian aid, especially in the liberated, contested and besieged areas, including by supporting the Interim Government and the Aid Coordination Unit of the National Coalition and local solidarity networks. We express our full support for the work being carried out by UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, UNHCR, UN specialized agencies and all humanitarian actors to alleviate the suffering of the Syrian people, and underline the urgent need to achieve significant results.

12. All armed groups must respect democratic and pluralistic values, recognize the political authority of the National Coalition and accept the prospect of a democratic transition negotiated in Geneva on the basis of the objectives listed above. We urge them to facilitate humanitarian access and respect humanitarian principles, as well as the work of humanitarian actors and journalists. We also urge opposition armed groups aiming at a free and pluralistic Syria to unify and ensure the security of the civilians in the areas under their control, including against the violations committed by extremist groups.

13. We condemn the presence of foreign fighters in Syria, both those fighting with the regime such as Hezbollah and other Iranian backed forces, and those fighting within other extremist groups. We demand their immediate withdrawal. It is important that countries supporting and encouraging these groups stop doing it, and that all groups respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria. We also urge the international community to consider political and economic steps to impel Hezbollah military wing, a terrorist organization, and other Iranian-backed armed groups to withdraw from Syria.

We fully support the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army and other democratic opposition forces in their action against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Extremist groups play in favor of the regime, damage the image of the democratic and legitimate Syrian opposition forces, and deprive them of local and international sympathy and support. We urge the democratic opposition forces to keep opposing the groups affiliated with Al-Qaeda. We share growing concern at the spread of extremist groups, including ISIL and Jabhat al-Nusra. The regime, contrary to what it claims, does not take any significant measures to fight extremism. On the contrary, it is fueling this threat by facilitating its development to exhaust the democratic opposition. The determination of Bashar al-Assad to cling to power and the regime’s brutality are the roots of extremism in Syria. As long as Bashar al-Assad remains in power, there is no prospect of peace and stability in Syria and the region. Only when the Syrian people control its future will there be a prospect of peace and stability in Syria.

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.

Key Hezbollah commander assassinated in Beirut

Top, Lakkees' funeral in Baalbek. Center, Lakkees and son Ali Reda, who was killed in 2006

A senior commander of Iran’s cat’s-paw in Lebanon, the militant Shiite movement Hezbollah, has been killed at close range in Beirut.

Hassan Lakkees was killed near his home in Hadath, seven kilometers southeast of the Lebanese capital Beirut. He was buried in the town of Baalbek.

Hezbollah blamed Israel for the killing -- a charge Israel strongly denied

Little is known publicly about Lakkees, but he was reputedly close to Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and an expert in weapons manufacturing, particularly drones.

Thousands of people turned out for Lakkees' funeral in Baalbek, a Hezbollah stronghold in eastern Lebanon.

Lakkees' coffin, draped in the Hezbollah flag, was carried through the streets of Baalbek.

The news comes a day after Hassan Nasrallah said Saudi Arabia was behind last month's bombings outside the Iranian embassy in Beirut.

Iran is a major backer of Hezbollah, which has sent fighters to Syria to back the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

A report on Hezbollah’s al-Manar TV channel Wednesday said Lakkees was killed as he returned home from work around midnight. It said Israel had tried to kill him several times previously.

Two neighbors at the quiet residential complex where Lakkees lived said he arrived home alone shortly before midnight and just got out of his car – a 4x4 Jeep Grand Cherokee -- in the parking space beneath his apartment block when he was shot four times in the head and neck at close range by two or three attackers apparently lying in wait.

They said two men were seen running away across some waste ground leading to boulevard Camille Chamoun nearby. The neighbors had no idea he worked for Hezbollah.

Some sources say Lakkees was shot with a 9mm silenced gun.

Israel denied any involvement in the death.

"These automatic accusations are an innate reflex with Hezbollah," Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said. "They don't need evidence, they don't need facts. They just blame anything on Israel."

Shiite Hezbollah emerged with financial backing from Iran in the early 1980s and began a struggle to drive Israeli troops from Lebanon.

Hezbollah fought a destructive 34-day war with Israel in Lebanon in 2006. One of Lakkees's sons – named Ali Reda -- was killed in that war.

Dr Ronen Bergman, a writer on military intelligence affairs for the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronot, told the BBC Lakkees "became known in Hezbollah as the guy in charge of manufacturing sophisticated weaponry, explosives, booby traps, he was a technical guy.”

He added: "Hassan was the leading figure who received Iranian guidance, he studied in Iran the issues of micro warfare, terrorism, counter-terrorism, and he brought this knowledge with him to Hezbollah, so he was one of these channels through which the Iranians gave Hezbollah their assistance."

“The Game of Nations” is defunct

This is the weekly think piece penned in Arabic by Saudi mass media celebrity Jamal Khashoggi for pan-Arab daily al-Hayat

Better stop being haunted by the 1950s and 1960s mentality. And better cast aside “The Game of Nations” book written by the famed ex-spy Miles Copeland.

Local or international intelligence operatives can no more change the course of history, build nation-states, demarcate borders or create national leaders.

Yes, they can sabotage a course of events or stop that course in its tracks, but they cannot reignite it or change its direction on a whim.

Some people are slow learners and persist in being obsessed by grand bargains.

Vast segments of the public still consider themselves “pawns on a chessboard” – another “book” that people should stop reading – and sit idly by waiting for whatever is decided for them. They would thoughtlessly subscribe to what columnists and political analysts propagate about plans in world capitals for “a grand political bargain” with Iran.

The grand bargain with Iran would see her reconciling with the West, putting her nuclear ambitions on hold (albeit temporarily), and sufficing with nuclear power production.

The deal would leave Syria, after its regime’s rehabilitation in one way or another, in Iran’s sphere of influence. In return, Saudi Arabia would get Lebanon as a consolation prize. A Lebanese government acceptable to Riyadh and amenable to Hezbollah would be set up.

Those with a 1960s mindset continue to redraw the map of the Middle East without installing “The Power of the Peoples” update on “The Game of Nations.”

After the Arab Spring’s defeats and setbacks, “The Power of the Peoples” is still alive and kicking. It will surely affect the outcome of events despite all the agreements that could be reached in Geneva-2 or at the public and hush-hush meetings being held around the globe to discuss the New Arab World, which is still in the making.

True, the Middle East is on fire and in a state of flux. The borders set in the Sykes-Picot Agreement are still in place, but the flow of people and across these so-called artificial borders has been ceaseless. Seeping through these porous frontiers too where these peoples’ pan-Arab problems.

All Middle East files have been opened concomitantly. It’s as though the world and history want to solve them all at the same time: the perennial Arab-Israeli dispute; chronic unemployment and underdevelopment; crises of democracy and freedoms; and even the Sunni-Shiite faceoff.

That’s what makes proponents of deal-making insist on the existence of “The Grand Bargain.”

When drawing a geopolitical map of the Middle East today, we find it leads off with the 5+1 talks in Geneva between Iran and the West. The negotiations have “temporarily” failed to yield an agreement for Tehran to suspend nuclear enrichment and for the West to temporarily lift some economic sanctions; and for the Islamic Republic to normalize relations with the West, ending its 34-year-old cold war with the United States.

Sitting on the sidelines are Saudi Arabia and her Gulf partners. Israel is close by. All of them are faithfully watching what’s going on with interest.

Only Israel is outspoken about her concern, fuming and threatening at times that any agreement reached will not stop her from acting alone to protect her national security.

In fact, Israel is the prime mover of Western and American interest in Iran’s nuclear program, which it perceives as an existential threat.

The Arab Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, don’t see it that way. They deem it as a threat liable to tilt the regional balance of power in favor of Iran, which is eagerly striving to become the region’s hegemon.

The Gulf Arabs are more concerned than Israel because the Geneva negotiations revolve around Iran’s nuclear ambitions and let pass Iranian interventionism and regional hegemony designs. The Geneva negotiations close the eyes to Iran’s obstruction of national reconciliation in Bahrain, her smuggling of arms to the Houthis in Yemen and what Prince Saud al-Feisal described as her occupation of Syria.

At best, the United States would tell us a solution of the nuclear problem would be crowned by a historic reconciliation bound to solve the other issues.

Such U.S. promises are empty words.

Washington won’t be bothered with what it describes as “local Middle Eastern” matters that don’t threaten her or Israel’s security – matters it does not understand or wish to understand in the first place.

Here we turn to the Syrian square on the Great Bargain’s chessboard.

Saudi Arabia wants the conflict to come to an end because the Syria crisis is taxing her and her partners in the region by virtue of the overflow of demographic changes and the threats made by al-Qaeda to turn Syria into its homestead. Al-Qaeda is already exploiting sayings of the prophet to sign up new recruits, chiefly from Saudi Arabia.

The United States for its part is not in a rush to resolve the Syria conflict. And herein comes the “Grand Bargain” theorists and their aforesaid talk of “Syria for Iran and Lebanon for Saudi Arabia.”

They stretch their imagination further, talking of a second deal with Egypt as the top prize and a third involving Libya. They might even dismember Syria as in the wake of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles with total disregard of the historical transformations that occurred in the region since the Arab Spring.

The most important of these shifts were “peoples’ power,” “cross border information” and the influence of “social media” and “organized political movement.”

These changes put a stop to underhand deals. Strong leaders who descend on their people “from the sky” are a thing of the past. And so are the “Secret Police” and the likes of the “Securitate” and the “Stasi.”

It is wrong to resist the power of history under the illusion that the powerful can strike deals and plan the future independently of the peoples whose divisions were caused by a lack of experience in democracy. These peoples are still in a state of flux and at times furious. They know what they want but are bewildered by it.

They will certainly not accept a new conqueror showing up on a white horse to lead them to a bright new dawn.

The era of one-man rule is dead and gone.

Assad needs personal safety guarantees – Russia

Senators slam Obama’s Syria sellout

U.S. Sen. Bob Corker and Russian Premier Dmitry Medvedev

(With news agencies) -- Russia hopes an international peace conference on Syria will be held by year’s end, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said, despite reported differences with the United States over opposition representation.

He appealed to both sides in Syria's civil war to compromise and criticized the opposition for demanding assurances of President Bashar al-Assad's departure as a condition for the so-called Geneva-2 talks.

"I hope it will be possible to hold the conference by the end of this year but we understand that the influence of all sides taking part is limited," Medvedev told Reuters in an interview late on Thursday.

"It depends to a great extent on the positions of the Syrian sides. We're pushing them towards this, and I hope everyone who talks to different circles in Syria will do the same," he said.

"It's a difficult process and everyone must compromise, including opposition leaders and the Syrian government, of course."

Russia has been Assad's most powerful backer during the two-and-a-half-year-old conflict, delivering weapons, blocking three UN Security Council resolutions meant to pressure him and saying his exit cannot be a precondition for peace talks.

U.S., Russian and UN envoys are to meet in Geneva on Tuesday as part of preparations for the long-delayed conference, which Russia and the United States first proposed in May.

The latest target date for the talks, November 23, looks likely to be pushed back and sources close to the negotiations say a main point of contention is the role of the Western-backed opposition coalition.

Assad Needs Guarantees

Western and Gulf Arab countries opposed to Assad say the Geneva talks should be between a "single delegation of the Syrian regime and a single delegation of the opposition" led by the coalition.

Russia sees the coalition as just one part of the opposition and has suggested that several delegations, including Damascus-based figures tolerated by the government, could represent Assad's enemies.

"I think that the ideas that are sometimes put forward - let's exclude President Assad and then agree on everything - are unrealistic as long as Assad is in power," Medvedev said.

"He's not mad. He must receive some kind of guarantees or, in any case, some kind of proposals on the development of political dialogue in Syria itself, on possible elections, on his personal fate."

Assad suggested last month that he could seek re-election in a vote scheduled for next year.

Medvedev said Assad might be worried by the fates suffered by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak - who was overthrown and put on trial - and Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, who met a grisly death after being ousted from power.

"You have to agree that when he recalls the fate of President Mubarak or Colonel Muammar Gaddafi ... his mood probably doesn't get any better," Medvedev said. "So you can't just say 'get out and then we'll agree everything'."

Sen. Bob Corker

In response to U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford's testimony defending the Obama administration's slow delivery of long-promised aid to moderate forces in Syria, U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Thursday called the lack of U.S. support for the opposition an "embarrassment," arguing that with Russia's hands "now on the steering wheel" in Syria, the U.S. lacks a strategy for resolving the conflict or for the region as whole, which is causing America's allies to question U.S. "reliability."

The hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee came as the prospects for Geneva-2 appear increasingly gloomy. The only positive note struck at the hearing was about progress on the U.S.-Russia plan to remove Assad’s chemical weapons.

Republican senators blasted the administration for striking a deal with chief Assad ally Russia on chemical weapons when there’s no letup to the killings that occur daily by conventional means.

“Everybody watching understands that, in essence, we’ve thrown out any real strategy there and are just trying to figure out a way out of this,” said Sen. Corker. “We’ve empowered Assad; we’ve weakened ourselves relative to other issues in the Middle East.”

Corker added,  "Let's face it guys: what really happened when the Russian offer came forth, it was less about seizing an opportunity and it was more about our country not having the stomach to follow through on a strategy over the longer term relative to Syria."

“There is no strategy right now for the opposition. None. There is no strategy,” Corker said. “And for that reason there’s unlikely to be a very successful Geneva 2 conference, because who is it that we’re going to be dealing with? Who is it that we’re going to be bringing to the table?”

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the committee chairman, took aim at the State Department’s year-old effort to organize a peace conference in Geneva.

“While the international community holds meetings about meetings, the Assad regime continues its brutal assault on the Syrian people, backed by Iran, Russia and Hezbollah,” Menendez said.

Using loaded language such as “feckless” and “abandonment” to describe U.S. policy, senators quizzed the diplomats and experts before them, not only on the obstacles blocking the Geneva process, but also on difficulties in the chemical weapons removal efforts.

They also asked about the reasons behind America’s failure to deliver on promised aid to the opposition.

One particularly testy exchange occurred between Corker, the panel’s ranking Republican, and Ambassador Ford, who was recalled in 2011 amid safety concerns. Corker suggested that Ford must be “incredibly embarrassed at where we are” on Syria and, his voice rising, demanded of the envoy: “Do you feel good about what our country is doing with the opposition right now?”

Ford, visibly flustered, replied: “There isn’t a person on my team at the State Department who doesn’t feel frustrated – frustrated – by the Syrian problem in general. But I have to say we do provide support to help them against the regime.”

Sen. John McCain

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., long a proponent of some form of military intervention to tip the war in the rebels’ favor, had the harshest criticism for the Obama Administration’s approach. He complained about U.S. diplomats bragging about sending trucks – some pickups from the U.S. were just delivered to the rebel command – at a time when Iran and Russia make sure Assad’s arsenals are full.

McCain said the administration had lodged the U.S. in an “Orwellian situation” in which it was working closely with Russia to dismantle the chemical arsenal but turning a blind eye to the conventional weapons Moscow sent into Syria.

He delivered a blistering criticism of America’s Syria policy, calling it “a shameful chapter in American history.” McCain said he understood why Saudi Arabia had been publicly feuding with the United States over what it views as America’s negligence.

“The reason the Saudis have divorced themselves from the United States of America is because of what you just articulated to Sen. Corker — trucks,” he said to Ford.  “That’s a great thing, trucks, as shiploads of weapons come in to the Russian port, as plane load after plane load lands and provides weapons — all kinds of lethal weapons. And we’re proud of the fact that we gave them trucks,” he said.

"You continue to call this a civil war, Ambassador Ford," said McCain. "This isn't a civil war anymore; this is a regional conflict. It's spread to Iraq. We now have al-Qaeda resurgence in Iraq. It's destabilizing Jordan. Iran is all in. Hezbollah has 5,000 troops there. For you to describe this as a quote, 'civil war,' of course, is a gross distortion of the facts, which again makes many of us question your fundamental strategy because you are — you don't describe the realities on the ground."

McCain was not satisfied, saying Assad's killing of civilians remained unchecked.

"Come on. ...The fact is that he was about to be toppled a year ago, or over a year ago. Then Hezbollah came in. Then the Russians stepped up their effort. Then the Iranian Revolutionary Guard intervened in what you call a, quote, 'civil war,' and he turned the tide. And he continues to maintain his position of power and slaughtering innocent Syrian civilians. And you are relying on a Geneva conference, right?"

The senators also received a grim update on the human toll – a death tally that’s tripled in the past year to 100,000 dead and 2 million refugees, turning a national crisis regional. In addition, 6.8 million people need help, the equivalent of the combined populations of Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and Connecticut.

“Behind these jarring statistics is the real toll on the Syrian people: the kids who haven’t gone to school for two years, the women who have endured rape and abuse, and the 5 million internally displaced Syrians who don’t have a place to live or enough to eat,” said Nancy Lindborg, the assistant administrator for democracy, conflict and humanitarian assistance at the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Obama flees Syria, but what with Saudi Arabia?

File picture of U.S. President Barack Obama and Saudi King Abdullah

By Saudi media star Jamal Khashoggi, writing for al-Hayat

There are many reasons for the Saudi-U.S. crackup.

The breach is mostly over Syria, where U.S. doublespeak has repeatedly been used to hide negativity. Incessant American statements denouncing the Assad regime are totally irreconcilable with happenings on the ground.

What infuriated the Saudis, who want a quick end to the Syria crisis, is what they believe to be America’s laid-back and indifferent attitude liable to prolong the crisis regardless of its consequences and its spillovers into regional countries.

The most conspicuous inconsistency in the American position is in the matter of arming the opposition.

America covertly bumps heads with its Saudi ally over the latter’s desire to raise the quality of arms supplied to the Syrian opposition, and even prevents its Saudi ally from delivering quality weapons by invoking bilateral arms sales agreements banning such transfers to a third party. At the same time, the U.S. does nothing about the shipments of Russian arms to the Syrian regime via Iran and Iraq.

The only time Washington intervened was to back Israel’s objection to Russia delivering game changing S-300 air defense systems to Syria.

The U.S. did not even try to thwart the participation in the Syria war of tens of thousands of Hezbollah and Iraqi Shiite militiamen although Washington has ample details about the role Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard and its Commander General Qasim Suleimani are playing in the war.

Unquestionably, the Americans’ answers – such as they cannot shut out Hezbollah or Iran’s Revolutionary Guard from Syria – are far from having convinced Saudi Arabia.

Riyadh is fully familiar with every aspect of America’s influence in Iraq, which has become the primary conduit for Iranian arm shipments and volunteers to Syria.

Israel did not hesitate to hit Hezbollah and Revolutionary Guard targets inside Syria when she felt they threatened her national security.

It did so without Syria or any of its allies reacting. If Israel can do this, so can America -- especially that Jordan paved the way for Washington, having offered the Obama Administration the chance to use Jordanian bases to deploy its armed drones against Syrian regime targets.

The U.S. Administration declined the Jordanian offer, which was repeated on several occasions in coordination with the Saudis, according to an informed source.

Paradoxically, the U.S. fully concurs with Saudi Arabia that the biggest threat to the security of the Arabian Peninsula comes from al-Qaeda, which is already active in Yemen. Both Washington and Riyadh are working hand-in-hand to fight it.

But at the same time, Washington is indifferent to the threat posed by al-Qaeda in Syria, which mushroomed with the arrival there of the original version of the terrorist group – namely, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), which Saudi Arabia perceives as a serious menace to her security. And so do Jordan and Turkey.

By sinking roots in Syria, ISIL, which is also known by its Arabic acronym DAESH, would have set up a network of human ballistic missiles there capable of reaching all regional countries.

It would be in a position to send suicides to all regional cities.

The group has already moved against the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government by sending suicide car-bombers to Erbil in retaliation to KRG President Masoud Barzani’s avowed readiness to help Syria’s Kurds against terrorists in Syria’s north.

The Erbil bombings shocked regional capitals particularly that the enclave was calm for years and has a strong security network.

Experts claim that intercepting a surface-to-surface missile with a network of Patriots is easier than intercepting a lone, cross-border suicide who gets his explosives delivered to him via another route. Once the suicide receives his explosives the chance of foiling his terrorist bombing becomes negligible.

By nesting in northern Syria and welcoming foreign fighters, DAESH will become a magnet for young Saudis outraged by the abuses in Syria.

Such young Saudis have been swayed by calls for Jihad still ringing across the Kingdom, but mostly underground.

Estimates putting the number of Saudi “mujahideen” in Syria at 4,000 are probably inflated, as happened earlier in Afghanistan and Bosnia. But even if the figure were one-fourth of the estimate, the number is substantial enough to reinvigorate al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia after the Kingdom breathed a sigh of relief when its security forces succeeded in stamping out its activities.

Riyadh still has reason for concern. Young Saudis in Syria deliberately conceal their true numbers and shun the media.

They do not emulate al-Qaeda, which is always keen to boost its recruitment campaigns by uploading propaganda videos about the heroism of its members on YouTube.

One expert in Syria who works for the United Nations puts it this way: “You see video clips of Chechens or Libyans much more than of Saudis. But they are by far the more numerous. I believe the Saudis constitute the third largest group of fighters in Syria after the Jordanians and Palestinians. Their shunning the media is worrying.”

This is probably because they know fighting in Syria violates their government’s instructions. They also realize Saudi security is aware as to who left the country to fight in Syria and will surely apprehend the lot on their return.

Al-Qaeda in turn knows this very well and exploits the fact to build a recruitment reservoir for future underground action in the post-Syria stage. Al-Qaeda-watchers know there is always a post-Syria, post-Afghanistan and post-Iraq.

All these Saudi concerns won’t dissipate except with a settlement of the Syria crisis that ends the war that is currently serving as fertile ground for al-Qaeda and Iran to spread their respective influences, each in its own way and in keeping with its own purposes.

 And although neither al-Qaeda nor Iran is a friend of Saudi Arabia, recent leaks in the American press reveal the Obama Administration is not only unconcerned, but wants the Syria crisis to persist.

This is bound to deepen the Saudi American rift.

The hurtful surprise came in a recent New York Times quoting White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough as questioning how much it was in America’s interest to tamp down the violence in Syria.

He argued the status quo in Syria could keep Iran pinned down for years.

In later discussions, McDonough suggested a fight in Syria between Hezbollah and al-Qaeda would work to America’s advantage.

His words evoke memories of “imperialist” statements made in the 1950s when the interests of arms dealers and oil companies determined American foreign policy with total disregard of peoples’ rights and interests.

We are not angels ourselves, but we cannot possibly be as wicked.

The price of such a policy will be paid by the Syrian people and by the whole region. The war between al-Qaeda and Hezbollah will drag in the region’s countries and armies.

U.S. President Obama considers U.S. health care reform more important than what he dubbed Syria’s inferno.

However, for us Saudis, Syria could be our heaven or our inferno.

So let us do something, albeit alone.

No matter what the cost turns out to be today, it would surely be less than what we would have to pay in three of four years.