Putin checkmates Obama over Syria

Vladimir Putin is a black belt and a Master of Sports in Judo.

Political analyst Amine Kamourieh, writing today for the independent Beirut daily an-Nahar, says the Russian president is also an excellent hunter and marksman. And he just proved to be an accomplished acrobat who can execute a full back somersault at the last minute to avoid falling into an abyss.

Kamourieh continues:

Putin can be a Machiavellian diplomat at a whim and is always prepared to hide his deadly iron fist in a velvet glove. His attributes, love of the spotlight and innumerable qualities while in office made him a media superstar on the world stage.

In the Syria crisis, Russia's new tsar showed a penchant for global leadership.

Yesterday, he proved to be a Chess Grandmaster. With one spectacular move, his "Rook" checkmated America's "Black King" that has been threatening Syria.

Hours earlier, a potential military strike from U.S. forces was hanging over Syria.

Talk was not so much about the strike's timing as about its sequels.

The Russian Grandmaster changed all this with an airtight proposal. 

If the strike on Syria is to deter Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from using his chemical arsenal, better put Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles under international control and spare Syria and the rest of the world the evils of war and its likely catastrophic aftermath.

The proposal puts U.S. plans for a strike against Syria on hold.

Putin's smart suggestion helps U.S. President Barack Obama and Assad climb down the high tree. By so doing, the Russian president avoided a head on clash between Moscow and Washington over Syria and let his Syrian ally off the hook while denying Damascus the opportunity of claiming "victory."

By yielding control of its chemical weapons, which it invariably described as a "strategic" asset in a face-off with nuclear Israel, the Syrian regime would be effectively turning tail on what it usually described as a "sovereign" issue. The Syrian regime would at the same time be implicitly owning up to (chemical weapons) violations.

Putin's plan also helps Obama save face after talking himself into a corner on intervention in Syria and finding it hard to muster the support of Congress, the American public and U.S. allies for action against Assad forces.

The plan for international control of Syrian chemical weapons steals Obama's thunder. If adopted and implemented, it would crown Putin's move as one of the greatest since the days of the Russian Grandmasters.

Pointers of Washington going soft on Assad

Haytam Manna' (right) who met Lavrov in Moscow March 11 is now in the U.S.

The oscillating compass needle of Washington’s Syria policy stabilized this week on seven signals.

I singled out one.

Raghida Dergham today lists the other six in her weekly think piece for pan-Arab al-Hayat.

So let me start with hers.

Filing for al-Hayat from New York, the American-Lebanese seasoned political analyst high spots her six:

1. A reversal of Obama One’s interpretation of the June 2012 Geneva framework concerning Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s role in a political transition. Obama Two’s new Secretary of State John Kerry is now saying, “We want to see Assad and the Syrian opposition come to the table for the creation of a transitional government according to the framework that was created in Geneva.”

2. A preemptive blow to the GCC partners in the countdown to the March 26-27 Arab summit in Doha after the Saudi-Qatari push to describe Assad as having lost his legitimacy and chosen to destroy the country in order to hang on to power.

3.  A submission to the Russian position that Assad is a “red line.” The hope is that Kerry’s concession to the Russians will be counterbalanced by concessions they can win from the Syrian regime.

4. A dawn of contradictions, rashness or a distribution of roles involving the United States, the United Kingdom and France. Kerry designating Assad by name as kosher interlocutor is irreconcilable with the positions of his British and French counterparts and allies in the UN Security Council. Kerry’s position is equally at odds with Hillary Clinton’s.

5. A shot in the arm to the mission of Syria troubleshooter Lakhdar Brahimi, who wants to dissociate the Assad Gordian knot from the commencement of dialogue and negotiation.

6. A pull of the rug from under the Syrian National Coalition’s feet in that Kerry’s bolt out of the blue risks splintering SNC ranks and forcing the resignation or dismissal of its leader Moaz al-Khatib.

My seventh signal of the U.S. policy shift:

Within 72 hours of his talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Syrian dissident Haytham Manna’ – who is outwith the SNC and is a strong critic of the Free Syrian Army -- landed in the United States for presumed talks with its National Security Council and State Department officials.

Here’s how State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland handled questions about Manna’s visit in her press briefing yesterday:

Q.: There’s a Syrian opposition delegation --

MS. NULAND: (Sneezes.) Excuse me.

Q.: Bless you.

Q.: Bless you.

Q.: -- that will be in town later this week, or maybe next week, with – headed by Mr. Manna’. Any meetings they are holding here at this building?

MS. NULAND: This is a different Syrian opposition group, or this is some – or representatives from the SOC [Syrian Opposition Coalition]? I’m not sure I know which meeting we’re talking about.

Q: He – no, no. Mr. Manna’ is not with the SOC.

MS. NULAND: I will have to check on that one. I don’t know about that meeting.

Q.: Is there a delegation of the SOC?

MS. NULAND: No. We haven’t yet, as we said yesterday, set dates with them for their visit to Washington.

Q.: I just wanted to follow up. Are you in contact with Mr. Haytham Manna’? He’s a quite a national figure in Syria – resides in France, I think.

MS. NULAND: I would guess that Ambassador Ford and his team do have contact with him. If that is not the case, we’ll let you know.

But overnight Manna’ himself posted the following on his Facebook page:

A delegation of Syrians will be visiting New York on March 13-15 and Washington on March 17-20 in pursuit of peace. The delegation, associated with The Democratic Civil Alliance (DCA) that emerged as a follow up to the “Geneva Declaration” of January 29. It represents a broad coalition committed to non-violence, democracy, pluralism and non-sectarianism and unites around a clear political plan for a negotiated solution in Syria based on the Geneva Communiqué of June 2012. Delegation members are seeking meetings with policymakers, experts, diplomats, UN staff, media and NGOs.

The DCA, considered to be one of the largest and most influential within Syria, brings together well-known Syrian human rights activists, professionals, political parties, and civil society groups, many of who have worked within the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change and Building The Syrian State current. Sharply critical of the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad and his violent repression, these Syrians are also critical of the increasingly militarized rebellion, the foreign arms flowing to both sides of the military conflict, and the Islamic fundamentalist influence within the rebel military forces. The Democratic Civil Alliance brought together all these forces around very solid and clear plan for negotiated political solution. They are reaching out to all Syrian players, political, civil society or even military players to join this alliance to find a safe solution for the country that puts an end to the violence that started spilling over the borders and is forming the perfect nurturing environment for extremism.

The mainstream international media tend to ignore the large secular and democratic movement within Syrian society and the complex multi-religious and multi-cultural nature of Syria, where there is broad opposition to a post-conflict Islamic government and fear of reprisals and of ongoing conflict after the fall of the dictatorship. The delegation reflects this perspective and aspires to find the broadest international support for its political plans. The three-member team has important political roles in the Syrian internal political scene.

Delegation members:

Dr. Haytham Manna’ has been a Syrian human rights advocate for over three decades. Manna was born in Syria and studied medicine at the University of Damascus. He now lives in Paris where he practices medicine and is the lead external spokesperson for The Democratic Civil Alliance. He has won awards for his human rights work from, among others, Human Rights Watch and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. He is co-founder of the Arab Commission for Human Rights and has served in leading roles in several other human rights organizations. He is the president of the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change in exile and the vice-president of the Syrian-based branch of the organization.

Dr Rim Turkmani is a founding member of the Building The Syrian State current which has made prominent cease-fire plans, worked to organize peacemaking groups at the local level and cooperated with UN Special Representatives Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi to promote a negotiated political solution. She is also a member of the executive committee of The Democratic Civil Alliance

She is an Astrophysicist at the Imperial College in London and is a specialist in the history of Arabic/Islamic science and its influence on the West. She has published many papers and books both on scientific and historical topics. She is the founder and co-chair of The Damask Rose Trust, a UK-based charity that supports development and education in Syria.

James Paul, senior advisor at Global Policy Forum and author of Syria Unmasked (Yale Press), and Mel Duncan, advocacy director of Nonviolent Peace Force, will host the visit. Both attended the Geneva Conference on Syria in January.

Khatib and Idriss delay Washington trip -- NYT

WASHINGTON (New York Times) — Leaders of the Syrian opposition have put off a visit to Washington for a series of high-profile meetings, including an expected stop at the White House, administration officials said Thursday, underscoring the challenge the United States faces in cultivating a still-evolving political movement.

The Obama administration had invited Moaz al-Khatib, the leader of the Syrian Opposition Council, and Gen. Salim Idriss, the leader of the opposition’s military wing, to make the trip this week, but Mr. Khatib told Secretary of State John Kerry last week at a conference in Rome on the Syria crisis that this was not a good time to visit.

No date has been set, but some American officials are hoping the visit might be possible in April…

(See my March 5 post, “Obama to receive Khatib and FSA chief of staff”)

Syrian people can only count on partisans for now

This tank captured by the FSA was festooned to mark Eid al-Adha

Saudi media celebrity Jamal Khashoggi was back home in time for Eid al-Adha after a trip to the United States via Turkey. The think piece he penned in Arabic for today’s edition of pan-Arab al-Hayat sums up his impressions from the journey:

As I made my way across the campus of Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, for last Monday’s face-off on foreign policy between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, I was struck by 2,500-3,000 media people credentialed to cover the event and the amount of cable laid to broadcast it.

Each of the two presidential candidates sought to convince U.S. voters he was better qualified to lead America over the next four years.

Beleaguered Syria was hoping to feature at that third and final debate.

The debate’s theme was foreign policy, but the two candidates ended sparring over economic policies.

Syria got its share with President Obama declaring he was “mobilizing the moderate forces inside Syria” and Romney professing Iran was backing Syria because “it’s their route to the sea.”

The debate left me downbeat.

How would Obama identify the “moderates” amongst the insurgents so he can mobilize them, or allow others to do so, if he were to win the November 6 vote?

Had Obama asked for my opinion, I would have said: All Syrian revolutionaries are moderates; so back them first and then exclude the ones who prove to be extremists.

Warning: Graphic footage in al-Qusayr Field Hospital

VICE commissioned renowned photojournalist and videographer Robert King to embed on the front lines with the Free Syrian Army in Aleppo. War-zone chaos ensued. In this episode, Assad forces hit Al Qusayr with a rocket attack while Robert is filming - it was targeted directly.

As regards Romney, Syrians would have to wait until he is inaugurated in January and familiarizes himself with the region’s map and its geopolitics before outlining his Syria roadmap.

Damn the deadly terror attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya in which the American ambassadors and three other Americans were killed.

The assailants harmed the Syrian people’s cause by making the attack a political football in the presidential campaign and turning U.S. public opinion against the Arab Spring.

Romney, for instance, seized on the outrage in Benghazi to speak of “a dramatic reversal in the kind of (Arab Spring) hopes we had for that region.”

A Turkish journalist also emphasized the weight of public opinion to me last week during my Istanbul stopover. We were both participating in a panel discussion behind closed doors on the situation in Syria.

The Turkish journalist said, “The Arabs want Turkey to do everything. But they have to help Prime Minister (Recep Tayyip) Erdogan galvanize Turkish public opinion, which doesn’t want a war. Turks are enjoying unprecedented prosperity. They fear losing it if the country slipped into armed conflict.”

The Turkish journalist went on, “What would help Erdogan win public opinion support for intervention, for example, is to see the Saudis and Qataris deploying squadrons of their warplanes to an airbase in southern Turkey. Such a move would send a clear signal to the Turkish public that their government is not in it on its own.”

The prevailing view in the panel discussion was that without U.S. cover, which could only come after November 6, Ankara wouldn’t go it alone and intervene militarily in Syria.

Turkey could create a no-fly zone (NFZ) over northern Syria. Effectively, the NFZ would prevent flights over the whole of Syria for geographical reasons. Safe havens in northwest Syria, which is already under rebel control, would follow automatically. They would accommodate hundreds of thousands of internally displaced Syrians.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) could then proceed to challenge airpower-starved regime forces all the way to Damascus. The regime has already lost the deterrence of its chemical weapons. These have reportedly been placed under full Russian control, with Russian assurances to Washington and its western partners. At the same time, a joint American-British rapid intervention task force was sent to Jordan to monitor the secured chemical weapons sites.

Once the regime’s airpower is “neutralized,” the insurgents would have no need for Stingers and other MANPADs. Instead, they would call for anti-tank missiles, which the Americans can approve at no cost to U.S. taxpayers since donators are at the ready.

Most Syria watchers concur that limited intervention can swiftly settle the battle for Syria and prevent the conflict from festering and becoming a fertile breeding ground for al-Qaeda. But they failed to sway the international community and Syria’s neighbors, who still prefer to wait and see the outcome of the U.S. election or maybe something else.

The best that can be done meantime is to appeal to brave partisans to help Syrians avoid living through another Feast of Sacrifice such as this one.

Omar Offendum, a Syrian-American hip-hop artist born in Saudi Arabia, raised in Washington DC and living in Los Angeles, release this single “#Syria” in March

Syria bazaar: Yemen scenario or Kosovo option?

Multilateral talks on Special Envoy Kofi Annan's Syrian mediation plan should seek to secure a ceasefire but not determine in advance the shape of a possible national unity government, Russia said today.

“The meeting in Geneva was intended to support Kofi Annan's plan and it must set the conditions for the end of violence and the start of an all-Syrian national dialogue, and not predetermine the contents of this dialogue,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told a briefing.

Lavrov is expected to discuss Annan’s proposal with the other four permanent UN Security Council members and key regional players in Geneva on Saturday.

Speaking in Moscow, Lavrov said the Annan plan was not, however, a final document and he expressed dismay that it had been leaked to the media ahead of the Geneva talks.

Earlier in the day, Bloomberg quoted three UN diplomats as saying Russia has endorsed Annan’s detailed roadmap for a political transition in Syria, a sign that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has lost the support of a key ally.

Persuading Assad to step aside and forming a transitional government to pave the way for elections will be at the core of the Geneva meeting, the officials said. All three asked not to be identified by Bloomberg because the talks are private.

Annan earlier this week gave the parties to the talks a few days to respond to a set of recommendations entitled “On Guidelines and Principles of a Syrian-led transition.” By late on June 26, the Russians had accepted the paper in full, including language that spells out Assad’s departure, according to the three officials, who all were informed of the decision.

The Annan document, which was reviewed by Bloomberg News, says a transitional government may include members of Assad’s government and opposition and other groups, although not “those whose continued presence and participation would undermine the credibility of the transition and jeopardize stability and reconciliation.”

Speaking in Helsinki on Wednesday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she had been in regular contact with Annan over his transition plan.

She did not make public details of his proposal, but noted: “I’ve been in close consultation with special envoy Kofi Annan about the prospects for a meeting that would focus on a roadmap for political transition in Syria.”

Annan “has developed his own very concrete roadmap for political transition, he has been circulating it for comments and when I spoke to him yesterday I conveyed our support for the plan that he has put forward,” said Clinton.

“We think it embodies the principles needed for any political transition in Syria that could lead to a peaceful, democratic and representative outcome reflecting the will of the Syrian people,” she added.

Yemen or Kosovo

Editorially, Lebanese political analyst Abdelwahhab Badrakhan, writing for the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat, says Annan’s roadmap for political transition in Syria leaves Damascus choosing between “the Yemen scenario and the Kosovo option.”

The Yemen scenario would nudge Assad out of office as happened to Yemen’s Ali Abdullah Saleh.

The Kosovo option would see the Syrian regime forcibly evicted by joint internal and international military action. Where the regime is concerned, it’s a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea.

To explain the current state of play, Badrakhan starts with a metaphor, writing:

After lip-reading the televised remarks of US President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, and observing their body language at the recent G20 summit, a Damascus denizen figured:

The American asks the Russian: How much for your share in the partnership (with the Syrian regime)?

The Russian: A million dollars.

The American: Too much.

The Russian: I’ve been building the partnership for 50 years. I invested a lot in it.

The American: I’ll give you $100,000 for your share and keep you as company chairman.

The Russian: Too little… I might not want to sell after all.

The American: Reconsider and better take the offer. In two months you could be pushed out and left with nothing.

In essence, Badrakhan continues, the elements of caricature in this hypothetical dialogue also sums up the regime’s current circumstances. “The regime was urged to end its crackdown, to lead the political reform and to stop the killings. The Arab League intervened to help it cease the violence and open a dialogue with the opposition. When none of this worked, a joint UN-Arab intercession followed. But the regime kept piling its failures and moving from stupidity to arrogance, from murders to massacres, and from shabiha to scorched earth and ethnic cleansing policies – all the time thinking it would get away with its war crimes.

“Having dissipated all chances of an internal political solution, a peaceful transition and a safe way out, the regime left the international community no alternative but to oversee its exit.”

Badrakhan believes the regime is unfit and can’t be trusted to play a role in Syria’s future.

“Endorsement of Annan’s roadmap for political transition in Syria at Saturday’s Geneva meeting would mark the start of an international entente on a political solution for Syria on terms the regime invariably sought to evade and sidestep.

“Even Russia and Iran realize the regime must pay the price for getting a solution going. Whereas the regime could have sacrificed a few heads at the onset of the crisis, it is now bound to part with its own.”

Despite its apprehensions, the opposition too would have to accommodate the international entente and accept the roadmap once adopted. That would be the only way to put all the pieces of the jigsaw together since “the regime is unable to prevail despite its arsenal and the uprising is incapable of bringing down the regime although it crippled it.”

In any case, says Badrakhan, all this is hypothetical. “The proposed roadmap could bear fruit quickly, or it could drag on due to regime intransigence or Russian-Chinese-Iranian considerations and ambitions. But the solution’s cornerstone is to see the last of the head of the regime and its bunch of murderers.

“The roadmap’s flaw is that it would seek to build an alternative regime from disparate components. Its forte is a burgeoning American-Russian understanding. What is certain is that its success or failure would determine the nature of international intervention needed in either case: the Yemen template if it succeeded or the Kosovo scenario if it failed.”

France holding the line on Syria in New York

Obama, Cameron and ping pong politics (AP photo)

The United States and United Kingdom are working in tandem on a UN Security Council draft resolution on Syria likely to placate Russia and China but infuriate France.

George Sassine, Paris correspondent for the Beirut daily al-Joumhouria, reports today that a Syria “breakthrough” at the Security Council is more likely “after Washington and London made a very significant (conciliatory) move toward Moscow and Beijing with the approval -- and on the insistence -- of both UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Kofi Annan, the joint UN-Arab League special envoy to Syria. But Paris is holding out, with Foreign Minister Alain Juppé saying France is against an ‘inglorious’ compromise resolution simply addressing the issue of humanitarian aid.”

The current chairman of the UN Security Council is Britain’s permanent UN representative, Sir Mark Lyall Grant.

Sassine suggests U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron agreed at their recent stateside bilateral summit to do absolutely nothing on Syria, sufficing with talk of “humanitarian aid,” “keeping pressure” and “tightening sanctions.”

He says the draft resolution being hammered out in the behind the scenes consultations at UN headquarters in New York focuses on supporting Annan’s troubleshooting mission and delivering humanitarian aid but omits mention of the Arab League’s Jan. 22 Syria peace roadmap calling for the transfer of power by Assad to his second-in-command.

Alain Juppé (AFP photo in Le Monde)

Sassine substantiates his report by quoting from Juppé’s March 16 Q&A with French daily Le Monde, where he says in part:

“The Arab League peace plan does not call on Assad to step down. It calls on him to stand aside  -- or, more precisely, to empower his vice-president to negotiate and kick start the transition. That’s the bottom line.

“I acknowledge the dilemma. Should one block a humanitarian resolution bereft of any political dimension at the risk of letting the carnage continue? Or should we accept an inglorious compromise at the risk of perpetuating the regime’s lifespan? (The choice) is extremely difficult. Hence the strong pressure by Ban Ki-moon, the British and the Americans at the UN to go that route.

“I have two red lines. I cannot accept putting the oppressor and the victims on the same footing. The initiative to cease hostilities should first come from the regime. The second (red line): we cannot settle for a humanitarian and ceasefire pronouncement. We absolutely need to refer to a political settlement based on the Arab League proposal.”