Why Did the G7 Refuse to Criticize 'Normalization' With Damascus?

Attendees take part in G7 foreign ministers meeting in London, Britain May 5, 2021. Ben Stansall/Pool via REUTERS
Attendees take part in G7 foreign ministers meeting in London, Britain May 5, 2021. Ben Stansall/Pool via REUTERS
TT

Why Did the G7 Refuse to Criticize 'Normalization' With Damascus?

Attendees take part in G7 foreign ministers meeting in London, Britain May 5, 2021. Ben Stansall/Pool via REUTERS
Attendees take part in G7 foreign ministers meeting in London, Britain May 5, 2021. Ben Stansall/Pool via REUTERS

Discussions that took place between the foreign ministers of the Group of Seven in London over the past two days revealed some change in the position of the United States and its allies regarding the Syrian file. While the group has maintained the same policy, efforts to implement it have declined and are no longer an urgent priority for the administration of US President Joe Biden.

Some parties suggested adding a phrase to the final statement of the London meeting, including an indication that the time was not appropriate for “any form of normalization” with Damascus. The assistants of some of the ministers drafting the proposal relied on two previous statements issued on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Syrian protests: the first by the foreign ministers of the US, Britain, Germany, France, and Italy, and the second by Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

The two statements noted that the proposed Syrian presidential elections this year would be neither free nor fair, and should not lead to any measure of international normalization with the Syrian regime.

However, the G7 final statement issued following the first direct meeting between the leaders in two years reiterated previous points announced in UN Security Council Resolution 2254, namely the chemical file and humanitarian aid, in addition to a brief reference to the Syrian presidential elections scheduled for May 26.

The statement read: “In line with UNSCR 2254 and 1325, we urge all parties, especially the regime, to engage meaningfully with the inclusive UN-facilitated political process to resolve the conflict, notably the Constitutional Committee, to include the release of detainees and the meaningful participation of women. This includes a nationwide ceasefire and a safe and neutral environment to allow for the safe, voluntary, and dignified return of refugees. It should pave the way for free and fair elections under UN supervision, ensuring the participation of all Syrians including members of the diaspora.”

Without any reference to the normalization, the statement added: “Only when a credible political process is firmly underway would we consider assisting with the reconstruction of Syria.”

On the other hand, the focus of the G7 was placed on the humanitarian and chemical files, as the ministers condemned “the Assad regime and its backers’ ongoing atrocities against the Syrian people and attempts to disrupt regular and sustained humanitarian access into and within Syria.”

“We call for the full, unhindered humanitarian access into Syria that is vital for alleviating the impact of the crisis. We strongly support the re-authorization of cross-border humanitarian assistance later this year so that those in need can get the assistance they require,” the statement underlined.

The G7 also urged the regime in Syria to adhere to its obligations under UNSCR 2118. It strongly welcomed the decision of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Conference of the States Parties to suspend Syria’s rights and privileges under the Chemical Weapons Convention, until it completes the steps set out in the OPCW Executive Council Decision of 9 July 2020 and refrains from further use of chemical weapons.

“We are firmly committed to accountability for those responsible for the use of chemical weapons and violations of international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, as applicable, and pledge support for the work of appropriate international criminal justice and investigative mechanisms and transitional justice mechanisms,” the statement concluded.

The G7 position on Syria converges with priorities set by the new US administration. Since Biden came to power, his team has requested a review of the Syria policy, which is expected to be completed this month.

It is noteworthy that officials working on the Syrian file in Washington avoid participating in public meetings, in an indication to a break with the previous approach adopted by former US President Donald Trump, which was based on “maximum pressure” on Damascus and "strategic patience", through the use of tools such as sanctions.

The new US priorities in the Syrian file include three axes:

First, the humanitarian dimension, by focusing on the renewal of the Security Council’s decision to provide “cross-border” humanitarian aid on July 10.

Second, the chemical file, by exerting great pressure on Damascus and Moscow to abide by the Russian-US agreement signed between Sergei Lavrov and John Kerry at the end of 2013.

Third, the fight against ISIS, by making sure that reducing the US presence in Iraq and the region will not affect the strategy of preventing the re-emergence of the organization.

In these three axes fall the US focus, based on which Washington’s allies in Europe and Arab capitals are acting, until a major development in the US-Russian understanding takes place to revive the “step-by-step” approach, which is currently difficult to achieve amid mounting tension between Washington and Moscow on the one hand, and the Europeans and the Russians on the other.



Arab Gulf in 25 Years: Prosperity in a Region on Fire

Saudi Arabia launched its Vision 2030 in 2016. (AP)
Saudi Arabia launched its Vision 2030 in 2016. (AP)
TT

Arab Gulf in 25 Years: Prosperity in a Region on Fire

Saudi Arabia launched its Vision 2030 in 2016. (AP)
Saudi Arabia launched its Vision 2030 in 2016. (AP)

Dr. Ibrahim Al-Othaimin*

I like to refer to Henry Kissinger in summing up the reality experienced in the region over the past quarter century. In his book, “World Order: Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History”, the former US secretary of state said “the Middle East is caught in a confrontation akin to—but broader than—Europe’s pre-Westphalian wars of religion. Domestic and international conflicts reinforce each other. Political, sectarian, tribal, territorial, ideological, and traditional national-interest disputes merge.”

The wars, he added, were caused by the collapse of the state and their transformation into fertile ground for terrorism and weapons smuggling. The collapse will subsequently lead to the breakup of the regional and world orders.

The Arab region witnessed unprecedented developments in the past 25 years that have altered its features and impacted the structure of its regional order. The Arab Gulf countries were at the heart of these developments. Despite the regional and international threats, they managed to maintain their internal stability and consolidate their pivotal role in achieving regional balance, underscoring their position as the cornerstone of security and stability in the region.

The September 11, 2001, attacks changed the shape of the world. (Reuters file)

First wars of the 21st Century

The September 11, 2001, attacks marked the beginning of the first wars of the 21st Century that would go on to change global security equations. They would also lead to massive pressure on the region by the terrorist al-Qaeda organization. The developments were a real turning point in global counter-terrorism efforts.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf were victims of a series of terrorist attacks in the past decades that targeted their security and stability. The worst of the attacks targeted a refinery in the city of Yanbu. It was carried out by Mustafa al-Ansari, an al-Qaeda member who had taken part in fighting in Afghanistan and Somalia. Another attack targeted Halliburton offices in the city of Khobar.

The Gulf countries responded to these challenges by taking firm counter-terrorism measures and launching efforts to dry their sources of funding. In 2002, the Gulf Cooperation Council countries approved a joint security strategy to combat terrorism.

In 2004, Gulf countries signed a counter-terrorism agreement during a meeting of interior ministers in Kuwait. The agreements established a legal framework for GCC efforts to bolster coordination between their members. In 2006, they set up a permanent security committee tasked with combating terror. The committee meets regularly to address terrorism-related issues and to bolster joint security cooperation.

The 2003 US invasion of Iraq was one the landmark moments in the war on terror. It forever changed the shape of the region, paving the way for a new chapter of unrest. The toppling of Saddam Hussein’s regime led to security vacuum that gave way for sectarian divisions and increased Iran’s influence, creating instability in the region.

Even though the Gulf countries opposed the invasion and stressed the need to respect international laws, they found themselves having to confront its fallout. On the political level, they expressed their concern over Iran’s growing influences and intensified their efforts to back Iraq’s unity, stability, sovereignty and independence. They supported the political process that was led by the UN, including holding legislative elections and the ratification of a new constitution.

On the security level, the Gulf countries sought to bolster their defense capabilities, intensify intelligence cooperation and boost security partnerships with the US to counter Iran's influence.

A US soldier covers a Saddam Hussein statue with an American flag in Baghdad on April 5, 2003. (AFP)

Major collapses

The region was soon swept by the 2011 so-called “Arab Spring” protests. The Gulf was again put to the test of maintaining its internal security and stability amid the major collapses of regimes and rulers across the region, starting with Tunisia, then Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen.

These developments led to the collapse of political systems and the fragmentation of the countries’ social and political structures. Chaos reigned, leading to unrest and protests, which were fertile ground for the emergence of terrorist groups and foreign meddling that seek their interests at the expense of regional stability.

The Gulf countries feared that these changes would lead to the spread of so-called political Islamist ideology in the Arab world. They approached the “Arab Spring” from a deep strategic view and with total awareness of the challenges at hand. This allowed them to take calculated steps that preserved their internal stability and regional roles. The countries also worked on consolidating internal unity and listened to the demands of the people to ensure that stability is maintained.

On the regional level, the Gulf contained the impact of the crises through supporting allied countries that were affected by the unrest. They also intervened directly in some countries, such as Yemen and Bahrain, to preserve stability and avert the spread of chaos.

After more than a decade since the “Arab Spring” developments, their impact is still very much felt to this day in several countries in the region. Throughout, the Gulf countries managed to maintain their stability and present themselves as a regional force that can help in confronting chaos and unrest.

The crises in Gaza and Lebanon have topped the concerns of Gulf countries. (SPA)

COVID-19

No sooner had the region caught its breath after the unrest than it was confronted by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. The world was faced with an unprecedented threat that helped reshape health and economic priorities and left a lasting impact on various levels.

The Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia, handled the crisis with extraordinary skill. From the very first moment the virus emerged, the Kingdom took firm measures and offered healthcare to everyone without exception. It provided free treatment, expanded its healthcare sector and rapidly launched vaccination campaigns that were commended by international organizations.

Despite the pandemic’s impact on the global economy and oil prices, the Gulf countries’ preemptive long-term plans and strategies, which called for easing reliance on oil, such as Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, allowed them to weather the storm. The Gulf countries showed vigilant leadership and an exceptional ability to adapt during the pandemic, allowing them to protect their people and preserve their economic and social stability.

Prosperity amid regional tumult

The region is now confronted with a new wave of escalation, especially amid the war on Gaza and the possibility that the conflict may spread in the Middle East. It also has to contend with the fallout of the collapse of Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria.

Amid these changes, the Gulf countries have again proven their ability to adapt by presenting effective diplomatic initiatives and deepening international coordination with the aim of consolidating stability in the region.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the war on Gaza remain a top priority. The Gulf countries have repeatedly called for ending the conflict. They have backed international and regional efforts to reach a peaceful resolution based on the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative and implementing the two-state solution.

In Lebanon, as tensions rise with Hezbollah, the Gulf countries have continued to support efforts that would bolster Lebanon’s sovereignty and stability through international coordination aimed at the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1701.

The Gulf region is also preparing to deal with post-Assad Syria, hoping to help in the country’s reconstruction to establish it as a stable state that shuns Iranian meddling. The goal demands critical coordination with regional and international partners to ensure that stability is restored to Damascus and the entire region.

*Dr. Al-Othaimin is a researcher in foreign relations.