Syria and the French-American Détente
Randa Takieddine Al-Hayat - 25/06/05//
Lebanon and Syria were the “guests”, at the first meeting between Philippe Douste-Blazy, the new French Foreign Minister and his American counterpart Condoleeza Rice. The new French minister is an outspoken politician who speaks directly in sensitive issues.
Rice strived at comforting her European colleagues that the U.S. Administration has no intention to change the regime in Syria. The matter comforts France, the country that does not seek to take any risks in changing the regime of any country, regardless of its behavior. The French Minister stressed the need to toughen the international firm stand against Syria. Moreover, France underlined sharing with the U.S. administration the necessity to see that Syria does not undermine the stability of its neighbors, specifically Lebanon and Iraq. Primarily, France is highly concerned for Lebanon’s stability and attempt to recover, while the U.S. Administration is contemplating further strict measures against Syria. Both countries are very serious about reprimanding Syria, should the International community find that the Lebanese-Syrian security apparatus is involved in the previous and current assassinations in Lebanon. The investigations are ongoing, although away from the media hype. The U.S. Secretary of State has confirmed to her European colleagues that any new assassination in Lebanon will have some very serious consequences on Syria, since the latter is responsible for implementing UN resolution 1559 provisions. Furthermore, Rice informed several European Ministers that the Syrian regime still has not fully grasped all the messages and signs “repeatedly addressed by the United States”.
The French experience with the Syrian “respond” regarding the European messages has so far been similar to the American one. The Syrian negativity became a reconciliation point between Paris and Washington. At the beginning of French President Jacques Chirac’s presidential term and following the French attempts to set a dialogue approach with both Syrian presidents, Hafez Assad and his heir Bashar Assad; France reached a conclusion that the Syrian regime is at an ailing condition and incapable of listening any message or advice, let alone figure them out.
Several demands to resume the dialogue between Syria and France have emerged from the UN Secretary General Representative, Terje Roed-Larsen, and earlier from Iranian President Muhammad Khatami, who had advised during his meeting with Chirac, to resume the dialogue with Damascus. However, France has lost trust, since it exerted great efforts during the past four years, to open up to Syria and its President. However, Damascus’s persistence to extend Lebanese President Emile Lahoud’s term in office, as the breach of all Syrian promises and commitments highly disappointed France.
Does Syria wish to maintain this international isolation? Does it want to see the U.S. on one side and France on the other, along with other Western officials, maintaining their pressure against Syria and preventing any dialogue or leniency?
The best way calls Syria to take positive steps to avoid undermining Lebanon’s stability. After being in control for 30 years, Syria is still capable of forestalling assassinations and facing any threat to undermine the stability, through its effective Lebanese networks on the ground. Only then and after matters definitely settle down, it is possible for France to open the diplomatic dialogue with Syria. Syria has lost a friend in France and in Europe, whose regional role was much appreciated by late president Hafez Assad. Moreover, Syria has succeeded in making the American-French closeness and reconciliation directed specifically towards the Lebanese issue. Even though, in other issues, the disagreement remain at a standstill. The change and the assimilation of the messages is the best approach the Syrian regime can adopt, should it seek to exit its international isolation.
|
