Syria standing alone in region

Francis Matthew

The developing split in the Arab world between Syria and Saudi Arabia is getting more serious as Saudi Arabia maintains its position as the pragmatic leader of the Arab states, and Syria continues its position of pro-Iranian solitude.

Three issues are fuelling the flames of this dispute: the two countries' backing of different sides in Lebanon, their contrasting attitudes to handling Iran's regional ambitions, and their differences over what to do about the continuing American-led disaster in Iraq.

The Arab summit due to be held in Damascus at the end of March provides a useful deadline to bring minds together on how to sort out some of the answers to the immediate points surrounding these issues.

Saudi Arabia's threat to boycott the summit, and the continued failure of Damascus and Riyadh to find any common ground, has led to a rush of diplomacy as other Arab states try to help.

His Highness Shaikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, visited both Iran and Syria two weeks ago, seeking a way forward.

This week King Abdullah of Jordan visited Saudi Arabia to discuss the run up to the Arab summit as well as the Palestinian peace process, before moving on to see President George W. Bush in the United States.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has just completed a round of visits to several Gulf states, including the UAE, during which he was making clear Egypt's view that Syria is the problem in Lebanon.

The political crisis in Lebanon is the most obvious point of dispute between Syria and Saudi Arabia. Syria has played a dominant or influential role in Lebanon for years, and, after the withdrawal of its troops, does not want to see its influence reduced even further.

It supports the Shiite group Hezbollah against the governing coalition led by Sa'ad Hariri, which is backed by Saudi Arabia and several other Arab states.

Unfortunately for Lebanon, neither side is weak enough that it has to back down, and neither side is strong enough to force its way through disregarding the other.

The result has been political stalemate in Lebanon, allowing a continued drift into chaos and failure which the country cannot afford. But all the various attempts to mediate, from within Lebanon, by the French foreign minister, and most recently by the Arab League, have failed.

The Arab world has lived with a failing Lebanon before, but one reason for the determination on both sides this time is that the clash in Lebanon is seen as part of Iran's efforts to spread its influence in the Middle East, in this case through its close relationship with Hezbollah, backed by its alliance with Syria.

Those opposed to Iran's greater influence on the ground in Arab states (which is the vast majority of Arab states) think that in Lebanon they cannot afford to give way. If they and their ally Hariri agreed to a larger role for Hezbollah in the new governing structure, they see Iran's influence becoming too great to tolerate.

Syria cherishes its role as Iran's only close ally in the Arab world, and has used this position to its benefit for some years. But now it is getting itself into a dead end with its pro-Iranian policy.

More and more Arab states are having to distance themselves from Syria over this issue, and this will have a major impact on Syria's other aspirations as it seeks to liberalise its economy and get investments from Arab and other states.

Active engagement

Saudi Arabia leads the GCC states in following a policy of active engagement with Iran while resisting its efforts to mobilise any forces friendly to its aims. The Saudis see grave dangers in Syria's support of Iranian aid to Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, and various Shiite groups in Iraq.

In the wider Middle East, the Saudi position and that of any Arab state supporting active engagement with Iran, is in opposition to the United States, which is seeking to isolate Iran and force its leadership into some sort of accommodation, in both regional terms and over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

By seeking to be neither allies nor enemies of Iran, Arab states are trying to find a peaceful way forward.

But such calm is not helped by the continuing violence in Iraq. The persistent failure of the US-led forces to achieve genuine security in Iraq, and the failure to agree on a consensus between the political groups and parties in Iraq, are major causes for serious political unrest across the whole region.

Too many different regional states see their vital interests being challenged in the continued confusion in Iraq.

Both Saudi Arabia and Syria opposed the invasion, but afterwards the Saudis along with most Arab states accepted the American-imposed reality and tried to work with the US to move on, although King Abdullah did describe the American presence as an illegal occupation.

In contract, Syria sought to actively oppose the continued American presence, and as a result has become the focus of considerable US attention.

The Damascus summit is important since the Arab states need to coordinate their various positions on Iran and Iraq, as well as prepare a response to the eventual failure of Bush's ill-fated Annapolis peace initiative in Palestine.

If the direct clash between Saudi Arabia and Syria over their allies in Lebanon derails the whole summit, it is not only Lebanon which will suffer, but also the Arabs' ability to build a formal consensus on the big regional problems. It looks as though the Lebanon stalemate will affect the whole region.


*Published in the UAE's GULF NEWS on February 28, 2008. Francis Matthew is the papers Editor at large.