US-Russian Deadlock Revives ‘Step-By-Step’ Approach in Syria

US and Russian military vehicles in the countryside of Qamishli, northeastern Syria, in May 2020 (AFP)
US and Russian military vehicles in the countryside of Qamishli, northeastern Syria, in May 2020 (AFP)
TT

US-Russian Deadlock Revives ‘Step-By-Step’ Approach in Syria

US and Russian military vehicles in the countryside of Qamishli, northeastern Syria, in May 2020 (AFP)
US and Russian military vehicles in the countryside of Qamishli, northeastern Syria, in May 2020 (AFP)

The Brussels V Conference on Supporting the Future of Syria and the Region, which took place on March 29-30, has successfully re-energized international attention given to ending the conflict in the war-torn country.

International interest in the battle-weary country had dwindled after US President Joe Biden took the helm in Washington and launched a policy review alongside different US institutions. But Syria is now back to figuring high on the agendas of world states.

Tensions between the US and Moscow, however, continue to loom over Syria, where American and Russian forces come face to face.

Military understandings have managed to prevent a US-Russian clash so far, but growing political dispute between the two major powers remains unresolved and has resulted in a “step-by-step” approach for navigating a settlement in Syria.

Moscow, as one of the key backers of the Syrian regime and its head, Bashar al-Assad, has thrown its full weight behind Damascus’ agenda for constitutional reform and elections.

On April 19, Syria’s parliament is expected to kickstart preparations for upcoming presidential elections. Back in March 2012, the country had held a referendum on a new constitution that allows having multiparty political system and multiple presidential candidates in Syria.

According to the new laws, the presidential poll must be held between 60 and 90 days before Assad's term ends on July 17, and only candidates who lived in Syria for 10 consecutive years prior to nomination can run for president.

More so, article 85 of the constitution says no candidacy for the office of president shall be accepted unless the applicant has the support of at least 35 members of parliament. Each lawmaker has the right to back only one presidential candidate.

Despite the country approving multicandidate presidential elections, no signs of who is planning to run for Syria’s highest office in 2021 have emerged yet.

Back in 2014, Syria held its first presidential race under the 2012 reforms, but Assad was re-elected.

Moscow has fully supported separating Syria having its presidential elections from the ongoing constitutional reform process stipulated by UN resolution 2254, which affirms that the Syrians are the only ones who decide the future of their country away from any foreign interference.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in statements on Wednesday, insisted that the 2021 presidential elections cannot be linked to the ongoing process mounted by the UN-sponsored Syrian Constitutional Committee.

Lavrov also reiterated the need for a deadline on the Committee’s work in Geneva and proposed that another round of presidential elections can be held after the Committee succeeding in its mission.

Damascus will likely agree to Lavrov’s proposal, given that it provides a constitutional cover for another term for Assad in office.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, since his appointment as the Biden administration’s top diplomat, has tackled the Syria crisis from two main angles: the humanitarian disaster and the fight against ISIS.

For the fifth donors conference for Syria in Brussels, the US was represented by US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas Greenfield, not Blinken.

At UN Security Council meetings, Blinken confronted Russia by calling for authorizing more border crossings for the delivery of humanitarian aid into Syria.

“As we’ve heard, an estimated 13.4 million people – two in every three Syrians – are in need of humanitarian assistance. Sixty percent of Syrians are at serious risk of going hungry,” Blinken told the UNSC.

“At present, the most efficient and effective way to get the most aid to the most people in the northwest and northeast is through border crossings.”

“Yet the UNSC has recently allowed the authorization for two border crossings to lapse: Bab al-Salaam in the northwest, which used to deliver aid to approximately 4 million Syrians; and al-Yaroubia in the northeast, which brought aid to another 1.3 million Syrians,” he argued.

Due to objections and obstruction from Russia on behalf of Assad’s regime at the Security Council, the UN has lost three of the four border crossings it used to bring humanitarian assistance into Syria from neighboring countries.

Russia has already signaled that it is not interested in renewing the last remaining crossing point from Turkey into Syria, known as Bab al-Hawa, for the transfer of humanitarian supplies.

Instead, Moscow has been strongly supporting the Assad regime’s demand for all aid to be distributed from Damascus across conflict lines.

This is taking place despite the UN and its aid partners saying that deliveries that go across internal conflict lines have been insufficient and open the door to regime interference on where the aid goes.
US-Russian disagreement at the UNSC, however, did not stop 79 delegations from 52 countries from pledging around $4.4 billion at the 2021 Brussels donor conference.

Nevertheless, partakers at the conference were not optimistic towards the Syrian political process arriving at a settlement soon.

“The conflict is certainly far from over,” EU Foreign Minister Josep Borrell told donors.



UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
TT

UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)

In 2006, after a bruising monthlong war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah armed group, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted for a resolution to end the conflict and pave the way for lasting security along the border.

But while relative calm stood for nearly two decades, Resolution 1701’s terms were never fully enforced.

Now, figuring out how to finally enforce it is key to a US-brokered deal that brought a ceasefire Wednesday.

In late September, after nearly a year of low-level clashes, the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah spiraled into all-out war and an Israeli ground invasion. As Israeli jets pound deep inside Lebanon and Hezbollah fires rockets deeper into northern Israel, UN and diplomatic officials again turned to the 2006 resolution in a bid to end the conflict.

Years of deeply divided politics and regionwide geopolitical hostilities have halted substantial progress on its implementation, yet the international community believes Resolution 1701 is still the brightest prospect for long-term stability between Israel and Lebanon.

Almost two decades after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United States led shuttle diplomacy efforts between Lebanon and Israel to agree on a ceasefire proposal that renewed commitment to the resolution, this time with an implementation plan to try to reinvigorate the document.

What is UNSC Resolution 1701? In 2000, Israel withdrew its forces from most of southern Lebanon along a UN-demarcated “Blue Line” that separated the two countries and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in Syria. UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeepers increased their presence along the line of withdrawal.

Resolution 1701 was supposed to complete Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensure Hezbollah would move north of the Litani River, keeping the area exclusively under the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers.

Up to 15,000 UN peacekeepers would help to maintain calm, return displaced Lebanese and secure the area alongside the Lebanese military.

The goal was long-term security, with land borders eventually demarcated to resolve territorial disputes.

The resolution also reaffirmed previous ones that call for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon — Hezbollah among them.

“It was made for a certain situation and context,” Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, told The Associated Press. “But as time goes on, the essence of the resolution begins to hollow.”

Has Resolution 1701 been implemented? For years, Lebanon and Israel blamed each other for countless violations along the tense frontier. Israel said Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and growing arsenal remained, and accused the group of using a local environmental organization to spy on troops.

Lebanon complained about Israeli military jets and naval ships entering Lebanese territory even when there was no active conflict.

“You had a role of the UNIFIL that slowly eroded like any other peacekeeping with time that has no clear mandate,” said Joseph Bahout, the director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy at the American University of Beirut. “They don’t have permission to inspect the area without coordinating with the Lebanese army.”

UNIFIL for years has urged Israel to withdraw from some territory north of the frontier, but to no avail. In the ongoing war, the peacekeeping mission has accused Israel, as well as Hezbollah, of obstructing and harming its forces and infrastructure.

Hezbollah’s power, meanwhile, has grown, both in its arsenal and as a political influence in the Lebanese state.

The Iran-backed group was essential in keeping Syrian President Bashar Assad in power when armed opposition groups tried to topple him, and it supports Iran-backed groups in Iraq and Yemen. It has an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, including precision-guided missiles pointed at Israel, and has introduced drones into its arsenal.

Hanna says Hezbollah “is something never seen before as a non-state actor” with political and military influence.

How do mediators hope to implement 1701 almost two decades later? Israel's security Cabinet approved the ceasefire agreement late Tuesday, according to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office. The ceasefire began at 4 am local time Wednesday.

Efforts led by the US and France for the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah underscored that they still view the resolution as key. For almost a year, Washington has promoted various versions of a deal that would gradually lead to its full implementation.

International mediators hope that by boosting financial support for the Lebanese army — which was not a party in the Israel-Hezbollah war — Lebanon can deploy some 6,000 additional troops south of the Litani River to help enforce the resolution. Under the deal, an international monitoring committee headed by the United States would oversee implementation to ensure that Hezbollah and Israel’s withdrawals take place.

It is not entirely clear how the committee would work or how potential violations would be reported and dealt with.

The circumstances now are far more complicated than in 2006. Some are still skeptical of the resolution's viability given that the political realities and balance of power both regionally and within Lebanon have dramatically changed since then.

“You’re tying 1701 with a hundred things,” Bahout said. “A resolution is the reflection of a balance of power and political context.”

Now with the ceasefire in place, the hope is that Israel and Lebanon can begin negotiations to demarcate their land border and settle disputes over several points along the Blue Line for long-term security after decades of conflict and tension.