OPINION_ Robert Fisk: Western agreement 'could leave Syria in Assad's hands for two more years'

Robert Fisk: Western agreement 'could leave Syria in Assad's hands for two more years'

Special Report: Need for oil routes buys time, claims key Damascus figure

Robert Fisk Friday 29 June 2012
The Independent


President Bashar al-Assad of Syria may last far longer than his opponents believe – and with the tacit acceptance of Western leaders anxious to secure new oil routes to Europe via Syria before the fall of the regime. According to a source intimately involved in the possible transition from Baath party power, the Americans, Russians and Europeans are also putting together an agreement that would permit Assad to remain leader of Syria for at least another two years in return for political concessions to Iran and Saudi Arabia in both Lebanon and Iraq.

For its part, Russia would be assured of its continued military base at Tartous in Syria and a relationship with whatever government in Damascus eventually emerges with the support of Iran and Saudi Arabia. Russia’s recent concession – that Assad may not be essential in any future Syrian power structure – is part of a new understanding in the West which may accept Assad’s presidency in return for an agreement that prevents a further decline into civil war.

Information from Syria suggests that Assad’s army is now “taking a beating” from armed rebels, who include Islamist as well as nationalist forces; at least 6,000 soldiers are now believed to have been murdered or killed in action since the rebellion against Assad began 17 months ago. There are even unconfirmed reports that during any one week up to a thousand Syrian fighters are under training by mercenaries in Jordan at a base used by Western authorities for personnel seeking ‘anti-terrorist’ security exercises.

The US-Russian negotiations – easy to deny, and somewhat cynically hidden behind the current mutual accusations of Hillary Clinton and her Russian opposite number, Sergei Lavrov – would mean that the superpowers would acknowledge Iran’s influence over Iraq and its relationship with its Hezballah allies in Lebanon, while Saudi Arabia – and Qatar - would be encouraged to guarantee Sunni Muslim rights in Lebanon and in Iraq. Baghdad’s emergence as a centre of Shia power has caused much anguish in Saudi Arabia whose support for the Sunni minority in Iraq has hitherto led only to political division.

But the real object of talks between the world powers revolves around the West’s determination to secure oil and particularly gas from the Gulf states without relying upon supplies from Moscow. “Russia can turn off the spigot to Europe whenever it wants – and this gives it tremendous political power,” the source says. “We are talking about two fundamental oil routes to the West – one from Qatar and Saudi Arabia via Jordan and Syria and the Mediterranean to Europe, another from Iran via Shia southern Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean and on to Europe. This is what matters. This is why they will be prepared to let Assad last for another two years, if necessary. They would be perfectly content with that. And Russia will have a place in the new Syria.”

Diplomats who are still discussing these plans should, of course, be treated with some scepticism. It is one thing to hear political leaders excoriating the Syrian regime for its abuse of human rights and massacres – quite another to realise that Western diplomats are quite prepared to put this to one side for the proverbial ‘bigger picture’ which, as usual in the Middle East, means oil and gas supplies. They are prepared to tolerate Assad’s presence until the end of the crisis, rather than insisting his departure is the start of the end. The Americans apparently say the same. Now Russia believes that stability is more important than Assad himself.

It is clear that Bashar al-Assad should have gone ahead with extensive reforms when his father Hafez died in 2000. At that stage, according to Syrian officials, Syria’s economy was in a far better state than Greece is today. And the saner voices influencing Assad’s leadership were slowly deprived of their power. One official close to the president called him during the height of last year’s fighting to say that “Homs is burning”. Assad’s reaction was to refuse all personal conversation with the official in future, insisting on only SMS messages. “Assad no longer has personal power over all that happens in Syria,” the informant says. “It’s not because he doesn’t want to – there’s just too much going on all over the country for one man to keep in touch with it all.”

What Assad is still hoping for, according to Arab military veterans, is a solution a-l’Algerie. After the cancellation of democratic elections in Algeria, its army and generals – ‘le pouvoir’ to Algerians – fought a merciless war against rebels and Islamist guerrillas across the country throughout the 1990s, using torture and massacre to retain government power but leaving an estimated 200,000 dead among their own people. Amid this crisis, the Algerian military actually sent a delegation to Damascus to learn from Hafez el-Assad’s Syrian army how it destroyed the Islamist rebellion in Hama – at a cost of up to 20,000 dead – in 1982. The Algerian civil war – remarkably similar to that now afflicting Assad’s regime – displayed many of the characteristics of the current tragedy in Syria: babies with their throats cut, families slaughtered by mysterious semi-military ‘armed groups’, whole towns shelled by government forces.

And, much more interesting to Assad’s men, the West continued to support the Algerian regime with weapons and political encouragement throughout the 1990s while huffing and puffing about human rights. Algeria’s oil and gas reserves proved more important than civilian deaths – just as the Damascus regime now hopes to rely upon the West’s desire for via-Syria oil and gas to tolerate further killings. Syrians say that Jamil Hassan, the head of Air Force intelligence in Syria is now the ‘killer’ leader for the regime – not so much Bashar’s brother Maher whose 4th Division is perhaps being given too much credit for suppressing the revolt. It has certainly failed to crush it.

The West, meanwhile has to deal with Syria’s contact man, Mohamed Nassif, perhaps Assad’s closest political adviser. The question remains, however, as to whether Bashar al-Assad – however much he fails to control military events on the ground – really grasps the epic political importance of what is going on in his country. Prior to the rebellion, European and Turkish leaders were astonished to hear from him that Sunni forces in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli were trying “to create a Salafist state” that would threaten Syria. How this extraordinary assertion – based, presumably on the tittle-tattle of an intelligence agent – could have formulated itself in Assad’s mind, remained a mystery.


***

26 Comments



Brigitta Badazzini • 3 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateThe question remains essential: Who gives the massive amount of funds needed to sustain this terrorist "revolution". You need a lot of ammo to kill 6000 well protected troops.



tyke87 • an hour ago• parent
−+ Flag as inappropriateUSrael



49niner • 5 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateIn truth, the outside world has proved ineffective in influencing the situation in Syria. The rebels are a motley coalition of forces opposed to the regime. No Libyan scenario here, not least because Russia has quite a lot a stake in maintaining the status quo. I would hope that we have all learned the limitations of "regime change" from the Iraq debacle next door. It is one thing to offer humanitarian aid and peacekeeping forces, which is properly the domain of the UN. But telling a sovereign nation who should wield power used to be called by that ugly word "imperialism". The continued cynicism of the major powers can be summed up once again by the phrase "oil and gas".



beppogatto • 4 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriate49niner rightly observes: "The rebels are a motley coalition of forces opposed to the regime." But why does no-one - journalist or commenter - explain why British and American special services are active in Syria?



Taleah Prince • 2 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateAssad's so-called 'extraordinary assertion' that a salafist state was being created in Lebanon was perfectly correct - as is the current 'activists' in Syria... aka. the Muslim Brotherhood who have the practice written in black and white that of sharia law with a theocracy as governance. Nowhere in the Brotherhoods diatribe do we here that they want to create a fair democracy. In fact the word democracy should never be used in the same sentence with Islam. The Brotherhood - also called the FSA - are using violence, murder and torture in order to depose the secular government and install their own doctrine for a middle east caliphate and the west support this... apparently.



The Courier • 2 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriate"Algeria’s oil and gas reserves proved more important than civilian deaths – just as the Damascus regime now hopes to rely upon the West’s desire for via-Syria oil and gas to tolerate further killings." Just about sums up the hypocrisy of the West - same thing happened to the Kurds.....human rights is always of the last concern and the quickest to be removed from the negotiating table!



EliteStryver • 4 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateAnyone who has read the Project for the New American Century PNAC will have a good grasp of the geopolitics driving events from North Africa, through the Middle East to Central Asia. Essentially, it's all about America's attempt to achieve monopoly control of oil/gas fields, actual and planned pipelines, in addition to transport choke points, to control the world economy. It's the only way the Americans can maintain, if not expand, their consumption of the world's diminishing resources at the expense of everyone else - including Europe, their greatest competitor. PNAC also provides a useful perspective for the on-going financial turmoil, which again is America's attempt to impose neoliberal economic doctrine and achieve monopoly control of world banking. Those who prefer detail can concentrate their energy in a hopeless attempt to understand a myriad of seemingly unrelated local issues like Syria.



Mark • 10 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateAfghanistan was invaded so a pro western govt would protect pipelines. I dont know why saudi arabia worries about sunnis in iraq when all the suicide bombings target shias. In lebanon sunnis support hezbollah. Only extreme salafist who dont even believe in democracy feel persecuted. What about Bahrain ? Another salafist dictatorship Same thing in syria only difference no boots on the ground jusy CIA Also enough properganda... Baby throats?? . Syria is becoming Northern Ireland during the troubles, sectarian malitais to blame not the goverment



stonedwolf • 9 hours ago• parent
−+ Flag as inappropriateWhich pipeline? And yes, mostly the trouble was paramilitary gangs. Sixty percent Republican, thirty percent Loyalist, and ten percent Security Forces, and that doesn't even begin to take into account that mostly the paramilitaries planned attacks against civilians, and the Security Forces targeted terrorists, Bloody Sunday being a notable exception.



Old Git Tom • 7 hours ago• parent
−+ Flag as inappropriateN Ireland Republicans blame security forces (spooks) for some of the bombings & shootings. They allege that the counter-insurgency strategy of gen. 'Ming the Merciless' Kitson was to stir as much mayhem as possible. True or not, that is clearly NATO/Pentagon strategy in North Africa.



OGT wildejamey • 6 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateMaybe. But time's running out for Russia and China and their self-interested blind eye to the massacre of the Syrian population. Once the US election is out of the way, Nato will have a much freer hand to side-line the redundant UN.



Tala LaFarouq • 5 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateWas this report prepared by Robert Fisk or Loveday Morris? I could swear it was the latter. I much preferred the story of " In Tripoli, posters of martyrs in the market place say it all – and more are on the way". Nevertheless, if the source is from Damascus, then need not bother debunk it. The pipelines stories are best left for a James Bond movie. I wonder if Greece is in so much trouble because of a pipe line? How about the reason the US didn't jump to help the Brits in WW-II early on was for a pipeline? The conspiracists will never dull from their usual excuses but it is politics and humanity like we know it. How many people you know will risk losing some of their furniture possessions to help a neighbour? The fact that Syria doesn't have much Oil is the primary reason why no one cares for how long this drags on.



EliteStryver • 4 hours ago• parent
−+ Flag as inappropriateSarcastic and shallow analysis in an attempt to muddy the water.



jahkemet • 2 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateThe Syrian President must be admired for his guts. There are no winners in this. The entire region is being radicalised from Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq etc. It will soon come to Saudia Arabia. Then we will see if the USA will call for regime change there and welcome the radicals. A region so radicalised will be a huge threat to Israel and Western Interests. For this we must give thanks to Jah.



Argovius • 2 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateI mostly like Fisk's columns, his observations are usually accurate but from time to time his analysis misses the point completely. I dont think the fact that the West is standing back has anything to do with "Oil routes" but more to do with a) lacking political will [US elections] and b) a true fear that the whole of Syria will descend in utter chaos & civil war (which is something Fisk mentioned himself a few columns ago).



Poor buggers EliteStryver • 2 hours ago• parent
−+ Flag as inappropriateThe only reason action in Syria is protracted is that the US wishes to avoid being branded the world's worst Imperialist. So, until Netanyahu runs out of patience, the US will continue to use proxies. In Syria's case this is Nato, especially Turkey, in addition to mercenaries from just about anywhere.



YvesLaPointe • 3 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateIf Bob wants to think outside the box, how about the abolition of Lebanon and Israel? One state was created to benefit the Christian communities and French merchants now has a declining Christian population; a re-construction of the two countries would reduce the Shi'a population and boost the Christian, with the Sunna as majority -but culturally there isn't much to choose between them only Lebanon has a daft 'confessional' political system which guarantees seats in parliament on the basis of religious identity, but which simultaneously means somne jobs will never go to Christians, or Shia'a or Sunna or Druze etc. Israel as a purely 'Jewish' state is a nonsense as so many non-Jews live there who have rights no different from Jews, and the dissolution into a new state with all the benefits that Israel has would transform politics in the region. Come to think of it, perhaps Turkey will admit that it stole the entire province of Alexandretta (they call it Hatay) in 1938 and 'return' it to where it should have been in 1918, in the Arab world. Egypt can then give the new Palestine a chunk of the Sinai desert; the Egyptians, Palestinians, Israelis and the 'New Lebanon' form a consortium to exploit the mostly gas reserves of the eastern mediterranean, and it will be peace in our time, and prosperity for all....the one thing people like doing if they are not killing each other is making money....



bandraboy • 8 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateYes yes its all the Wests fault as usual. Seriously Fisk don't you ever get tired of writing the same old garbage about the West and Israel? Oil pipelines through Syria from Iran. Thats a new one even for you. Forgetting of course that Iran and Syria don't share a border.



takeoman • 5 hours ago• parent
−+ Flag as inappropriateAs usual you either didn't read or else understand the article.



theredcomyn • 5 hours ago
−+ Flag as inappropriateFisk finally timidly implicates Russia, but only in the context of Russia-US negotiations. As if the US has an equal hand to play in Syria. He is clealy unwilling to call out Russia as the player at the table with the aces to play. Why is it that Fisk can't show some backbone when it is time for some blunt criticism of the the Russsians ? He has no problem spewing his vitriol at other subjects of his commentary.



EliteStryver • 3 hours ago• parent
It is difficult to criticize Russia seeing that America's plan is to emasculate the country economically and prevent it from supplying Europe with energy. Indeed, any European/Russian cooperation is a nightmare for the US.


______

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?




Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog".
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .



conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
29062012
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC