For weeks, the Middle East has been buzzing with talk that Turkey has been mediating secret peace negotiations between Israel and Syria. On Wednesday, the speculation ended: both governments confirmed the reports, issuing statements just minutes apart. The dialogue, according to the Israeli version, is intended to be "serious and continuous" and would aim for a "comprehensive peace in accordance with the Madrid Conference terms of reference." The brief mention of the Madrid Conference, Israeli-Arab negotiations that were cosponsored by Washington and Moscow in 1991, is particularly important because it may signal renewed U.S. involvement, according to former Israeli foreign ministry official Alon Liel, who spent nearly two years between 2004 and 2006 in secret talks with a Syrian mediator. Shortly after the announcement, Liel spoke with NEWSWEEK's Kevin Peraino.
What do you see as the most problematic potential sticking point in the upcoming negotiations?
I think the most complicated area will be the relationship between Syria and Iran. I see a big battle here. Syria will want to maintain contact with Iran. Once you have such a statement, imagine the feeling of Iran. It's not only Olmert taking a risk, it's also Assad taking a very big risk. Both leaders are doing something very courageous. Also, Syria will have to bring about a change of behavior regarding Hamas.
Is it realistic to expect Syria would completely sever ties with Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas as part of a deal?
I'm not sure Syria and Iran can be strategic allies [after a peace deal]. A comprehensive peace agreement will necessitate meaningful changes. I don't think Syria can have peace and normal relations with both Israel and Hizbullah, or Israel and Hamas. It's almost mutually exclusive.
Could you see a day when Hizbullah is carrying out military operations against Syria as a result?
I really don't know how Hizbullah will act. I don't think they'd want to destroy--in a stupid way, from their perspective--this ongoing contact they have [with Damascus]. I don't know about the Iranian reaction. Nobody should start speculating.
Might be something, might be nothing, but make no mistake; Ahmadinejad is "displeased" by the developments.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has expressed his surprise and displeasure at Syria's "violation of its commitment to Iran" by holding talks with Israel, the London-based pan-Arabic daily Asharq alawsat reported Friday.
The report also said that Iran's Supreme National Security Council would examine a message from Syria about the talks with Israel in order to decide on an "appropriate response."
Meanwhile, the editor of one of Iran's reformist newspapers said that the council had instructed Iranian media outlets, including Internet sites, to "ignore" the topic of the Syria-Israel talks.
This has "win-win" written all over it. If they achieve a peace deal, they will alienate Iran and further isolate it from the rest of the world. It will push Iran to the point where they will HAVE to make concessions on other areas, including their nuclear program. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that bombing the Syrian nuclear facility was an almost perfect operation. They got rid of the facility, proved that they could take it out, AND showed Iran that the Israeli's weren't fucking around all in one fatal swoop.
Now you have Syria and Israel in peace talks, that means that unless there's something else going on, this will drive a wedge between Syria and Iran. Which is also a nice "win-win" situation as well. I'm getting good news across the board here right before my long Memorial Day weekend. I think the only thing that will make it even better is if we caught Osama and his merry band of cocksuckers.
Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment