BEIRUT, Lebanon — At the end of the press conference unveiling their deal over Syria’s chemical weapons program, a smiling Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov appeared to exchange a joke before walking offstage. Some of America’s allies in the fight against President Bashar al-Assad, however, weren’t laughing.
Even as a Syrian official hailed the Sept. 14 plan as a "victory" for the Assad regime, the reaction from U.S. partners in the Middle East ranged from skepticism to outright hostility. Turkey, which has been at the forefront of the anti-Assad cause, said it welcomed the initiative — but expressed doubts that the Syrian regime would comply with its terms. Officials in Ankara warned that the deal does nothing to resolve the Syrian crisis and said that more must be done to pressure Assad to relinquish power.
"The Syrian crisis is not only about use of chemical weapons — up until now, more than 100,000 people have died, not because of the chemical weapons, but because of increasing and indiscriminate violence perpetrated by the regime," said a Turkish official. "This is the root problem in Syria. This is what constitutes a clear and present danger to the region and international security."
Kerry visits Paris on Monday, where he is meeting with leaders who supported a military strike on Syria: French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, British Foreign Secretary William Hague, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, and Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal. His goal will be to not only sell the initiative to U.S. allies, but also to hammer out the details of a U.N. Security Council resolution on Syria with the European powers. The Turkish message will be that, deal or no deal, Washington should keep the pressure on the Assad regime.
"There is kind of an emerging perception that now we have this agreement about the chemical weapons, everything is fine," said the Turkish official. "No, this is not the case.… The Assad regime should not think that they have been given a green light to continue with their conventional violence."
Syrian rebels, who have already ignored U.S. and European pleas to not publicly criticize the deal, also fear that it could represent a setback to their larger battle against the Assad regime. The Syrian opposition coalition criticized the plan for "embolden[ing] the regime to escalate its military offensive," and Free Syrian Army spokesman Qassem Saad Eddine said the agreement could "go to hell."
The reception by the Arab Gulf states has been equally frosty. Saudi Arabia was one of the most aggressive proponents of a U.S. intervention: Riyadh’s ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, rushed back to D.C. from vacation last month to advocate for military strikes against the Syrian regime. Now, according to multiple analysts who follow Saudi Arabia closely, the kingdom fears that the United States is retreating from its promises to hold Assad accountable for the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack.
The Gulf states consider the plan "an absolute waste of time," said Nawaf Obaid, a fellow at Harvard University Kennedy School’s Belfer Center who serves as an advisor to Saudi diplomats. "This is the perfect ‘save my ass plan’ that Bashar needed, and the Russians gave it to him."
Obaid predicted that the U.S. leadership vacuum will cause Riyadh to deepen its involvement with the rebels. Obama’s acquiescence to the plan, said Obaid, "really hit [his] credibility in the region as an indecisive and even potentially weak president."
Saudi King Abdullah has long had a unique interest in Syrian affairs. This is partly a matter of tribal ties: His mother was a member of the massive Shammar tribe, which boasts over 500,000 members in Syria, and the king has cemented these alliances through marriage. Abdullah also was one of the most influential Saudi officials regarding Syria in the early 1980s, when he worked closely with Rifaat al-Assad, the brother of former President Hafez al-Assad and then the head of the Defense Companies, the most feared enforcers at the time of Assad family rule.
The Saudi media is already suggesting Assad is breaching the deal. The daily al-Watan, quoting Syrian opposition members, claimed that regime forces are smuggling chemical weapons to the Lebanese paramilitary organization Hezbollah. Meanwhile, the Lebanese daily al-Mustaqbal, which is tied to an anti-Assad political party sympathetic to Riyadh, accused Syria of smuggling equipment for manufacturing chemical weapons to Iraq.
But however the process plays out, the Syrian rebels worry that the Obama administration just entangled itself in a diplomatic effort that will preserve Assad’s rule for at least the next year. "We feel let down by the international community," rebel military chief Salim Idris said. "We don’t have any hope."
John Hudson is a staff writer for Foreign Policy where he chases down stories from Foggy Bottom to the White House, the Pentagon to Embassy Row. Between 2009 and 2012, John covered politics and global affairs for The Atlantic Wire. In 2008, he covered the August War between Russia and Georgia for Salon.com and other news outlets. Over the years, he's dug up resignation-causing FEC documents; unmasked world-famous Internet trolls; exposed bizarre Photoshopping by government media; and revealed a secret Iranian military facility. John's weakness is cold craft beer from his birthplace of Grand Rapids, Michigan. He's appeared on MSNBC, BBC, C-SPAN, Fox News radio, and other broadcast outlets.| The Cable |
Iran muscles in; On cyber, DOD needs a plan; Carter talks post-2014; the Taliban kills a Pakistani general in Swat; The tick-tock on Syria included a mock presser at the Pentagon; and a bit more.Gordon Lubold
Gordon Lubold is a national security reporter for Foreign Policy. He is also the author of FP's Situation Report, an e-mailed newsletter that is blasted out to more than 70,000 national security and foreign affairs subscribers each morning that includes the top nat-sec news, breaking news, tidbits, nuggets and what he likes to call "candy." Before arriving at FP, he was a senior advisor at the United States Institute of Peace in Washington, where he wrote on national security and foreign policy. Prior to his arrival at USIP, he was a defense reporter for Politico, where he launched the popular Morning Defense early morning blog and tip-sheet. Prior to that, he was the Pentagon and national security correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor, and before that he was the Pentagon correspondent for the Army Times chain of newspapers. He has covered conflict in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries in South Asia, and has reported on military matters in sub-Saharan Africa, East Asia and Latin America as well as at American military bases across the country. He has spoken frequently on the sometimes-contentious relationship between the military and the media as a guest on numerous panels. He also appears on radio and television, including on CNN, public radio's Diane Rehm and To the Point, and C-SPAN's Washington Journal. He lives in Alexandria with his wife and two children.| Situation Report |
Shane Harris is a senior staff writer at Foreign Policy, covering intelligence and cyber security. He is the author of The Watchers: The Rise of America's Surveillance State, which chronicles the creation of a vast national security apparatus and the rise of surveillance in America. The Watchers won the New York Public Library’s Helen Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism, and the Economist named it one of the best books of 2010. Shane is the winner of the Gerald R. Ford Prize for Distinguished Reporting on National Defense. He has four times been named a finalist for the Livingston Awards for Young Journalists, which honor the best journalists in America under the age of 35. Prior to joining Foreign Policy, he was the senior writer for The Washingtonian and a staff correspondent at National Journal.| The Cable |