Syria: First the Golan Heights, then direct talks

[bemildred]

A senior Syrian official said on Tuesday that no direct peace negotiations would be held with Israel until it recognizes what Damascus regards as requirements for a deal, the full return of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria during the 1967 Six-Day War.

Indirect talks between Syria and Israel are expected to resume soon in Turkey, which has been mediating between the two sides since last year.

The Damascus government and Israel have kept secret the details of the talks. Israel has linked a peace agreement to Syria distancing itself from Iran and severing ties with Lebanon's Hezbollah and the Palestinian group Hamas. "I think it is too early to resume direct talks. There are conditions," Syria's Deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal al-Mekdad told reporters.

"I hope Israel responds to the requirements of peace, which are the end of the occupation of Palestine and the establishment of a Palestinian state, restoration of the Syrian Golan and pull out of remaining occupied Lebanese territory," he added.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/991531.html

[UndertheOcean]

1. How about first admitting and apologising for the Hama massacre

Then , and maybe then , the Syrian government can be trusted.

I personally can't bring myself to believe a single word uttered by that Alawite dictatorship.

[bemildred]

2. I would never trust them.

The question is: do you want to make peace and normalize relations.

[UndertheOcean]

3. Ofcourse , but Israel should be very , very careful in dealing with them.

Lets hope one day real Democracy comes to Syria

[bemildred]

4. Yeah, I was really worried they were going to be clumsy about it.

Democracy in Syria would be nice, but do you really think a peace agreement should wait for that?

[UndertheOcean]

6. Peace agreement schmeeze agreement

Its just ink on paper , Jordan had a peace agreement with Israel , did that bring the Palestinian refugees in Jordan back home.


The problems in the region are so fundamental , a photoup between Israel and Syria won't make a dent in them.

[bemildred]

8. OK. Let's avoid any happy talk. No photo ops. nt

[shaayecanaan]

5. So Israel should not negotiate with Syria...

because Syria has killed too many Arabs for Israel's liking? That would indeed be a red-letter day for the region.

As for Syrian democracy, would you prefer a teetering Lebanese-style consociationalist mess or simply all-out domination by the Muslim brotherhood? Im sure either outcome would improve the prospects of peace exponentially.

[bemildred]

7. I really have no idea what you mean.

I get the first sentence, sort of. But the rest I have no idea what it is you want to say.

[shaayecanaan]

9. always ready to help...

The poster to whom I responded was suggesting that Israel should not negotiate with Syria until it apologised for the Hama massacre. This was a large massacre by the Syrian regime of some 25,000 pro-opposition Sunni Arabs. The long-term significance of this was that the all Sunni affection for the government disappeared and since then the Syrian government has ruled by using the stick much more than the carrot, and they were already pretty fond of the stick in the first place.

Of course, Israel itself killed a goodly amount of Arabs during the first Lebanon war, so I was essentially commenting on the irony of the suggestion.

The oligarchy ruling Syria at the moment is comprised mostly of Alawites. President Assad is an Alawite. This is a nominally Shia sect which tended to revere Mohammed almost as if he were a deity or a Son of God, although recently its theology has moved more towards conformity with orthodox Shia Islam. Nevertheless, Alawites traditionally have fractious relations with hardline Sunni muslims which tend to view Alawite theology as heresy.

The Alawite regime remains in charge largely because it has the acquiescence of Druze and various Christian groupings that fear what would happen if Syria became a Sunni theocracy, whereas the ideology of the current government is secular and Baathist.

It is for this reason that Syria fears populist Sunni Muslim movements such as al-Qaeda more than any other state, since it sits on a demographic powder-keg of seething Sunni discontent with the regime. Quttebist Sunni groups such as the Qaeda know this, and are furiously trying to topple the regime from within. On the other hand, the Syrian secret police are just as furiously trying to stop them.

What is fascinating is that the US has absolutely no concept of this, in the same way that it had very little idea that Saddam Hussein's Baath party and Islamic fundamentalists were actually mortal enemies rather than allies. You would think that a $400 billion a year business could afford to pay someone who actually knew a thing or two about the middle-East, but apparently not.

Anyway, were Syria to become a democracy, it would either resemble Lebanon in having an uneasy truce between the various factions, or simply all-out dominance by the Sunni Arabs which are demographically the largest part of Syria. The main opposition group, the Muslim brotherhood, have overall good relations with the Palestinians and oppose peace with Israel. Either way, peace with Israel is very unlikely to come about as a result of democracy in Syria.

Hopefully this assists you.

[bemildred]

10. Thank you. That's much clearer. nt