Extension, Expansion of Cross-Border Aid Delivery Tops Washington’s ‘3’ Goals in Syria

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken at a presser in Rome (Reuters)
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken at a presser in Rome (Reuters)
TT

Extension, Expansion of Cross-Border Aid Delivery Tops Washington’s ‘3’ Goals in Syria

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken at a presser in Rome (Reuters)
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken at a presser in Rome (Reuters)

At a closed session in Rome, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken defined three main goals Washington has for Syria. The most urgent of which is convincing Russia to allow an “extension” and “expansion” on the UN resolution for cross-border humanitarian relief in the war-torn country.

Dovetailing with the Biden administration’s plan, Moscow and Washington decided on holding a private meeting to bring together high-ranking officials from both sides in Geneva next week.

The meeting will likely include the Russian Special Presidential Envoy on Syrian Reconciliation Alexander Lavrentiev and US National Security Council Coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa Brett McGurk.

Blinken’s attendance in Rome represents the first high-profile political step taken by Biden’s team since he took office, Western officials who attended the Rome meeting told Asharq Al-Awsat.

They noted the importance of the Rome meeting since the 2015 “Vienna peace talks for Syria,” which saw the participation of over 20 countries, including Russia and Iran, have nearly faded away.

For Washington, the Rome conference presented a unique opportunity to restore its leadership role by coordinating with allies and expanding the “mini-group” that included seven major and Arab countries.

It also restored consultation channels with Qatar and Turkey, which had sided with Russia in the “Astana Talks” or the “Doha Platform,” and bridging gaps with two influential blocs in the Syrian matter, the Arab League and the European Union (EU).

“URGENT RELIEF”

According to available information, Blinken filled in participating ministers in Rome about Washington’s three primary goals in Syria today:

The first goal, which is “urgent,” concerns an appeal for extending and expanding the scope of an international resolution for cross-border humanitarian delivery in Syria. During a meeting with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Geneva on May 16, US President Joe Biden had raised the issue of extending the special international resolution, whose period of operation is set to expire on July 10.

Indeed, the Biden administration’s opinion on the matter was made clear. It set the premise that the Russian position on this issue will be decisive and affect Washington’s positions in the next stage.

“The US message is: If Russia responds to Washington’s desire, bilateral dialogue on Syria can be resumed and expanded, and other positive measures can be taken,” a western diplomat told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“But if Moscow votes against reauthorizing and expanding the resolution (from one to three crossings), a stalemate on the Syrian issis fated, especially amid calls in Washington to escalate pressure and resume the imposition of sanctions,” the diplomat explained.

The US-Russian dialogue in Geneva is slated for a few days later and will be the first of its kind under the Biden administration.

It is noteworthy that the last meeting a Russian official held with a US counterpart on Syria was with former US envoy James Jeffrey in Vienna last July. Infected with the coronavirus, Jeffery was unable to attend the subsequent US-Russian meeting in Geneva last August.

The impromptu US-Russia track and consultations on Syria were launched by McGurk and the Kremlin’s Sergei Vershinin.

“I think that we see here an opportunity to work constructively with Russia on this issue of getting humanitarian assistance to Syrians all across the country, especially now that we have the Covid-19 pandemic to deal with and there has been virtually no assistance to battle Covid-19 that’s gotten into the northeast in particular,” said the Acting Assistant Secretary Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Joey Hood.

“So, it’s a growing humanitarian problem and one that I don’t think anyone wants to see exacerbated,” added Hood.

Meanwhile, in Rome, Biden reaffirmed that the matter is of utmost significance to Washington.

“ISIS & TRUCE”

Washington’s second goal in Syria is to focus on eliminating ISIS, the only reason it is present east of Syria’s Euphrates Region.

“Together, we must stay as committed to our stabilization goals (in the east of the Euphrates Region) as we did to our military campaign that resulted in victory on the battlefield,” Blinken told reporters.

He pointed out the pressing need to resolve the issue of tens of thousands of ISIS captives in prisons operated by the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

“This situation is simply untenable. It just can’t persist indefinitely. The US continues to urge countries of origin, including coalition partners, to repatriate, rehabilitate, and, where applicable, prosecute their citizens,” said Blinken.

Similarly, a joint communique by the ministerial meeting of the Global Coalition against ISIS said reaffirmed that “the Coalition stands with the Syrian people in support of a lasting political settlement in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 2254.”

“The Coalition must continue to be vigilant against the threat of terrorism, in all its forms and manifestations, to build on the success it has achieved and continue to act together against any threats to this outcome and to avoid security vacuums that ISIS may exploit,” the joint statement added.

As for Washington’s third goal, it is related to the necessity of “continuing the implementation of the ceasefire in Syria” despite Blinken having recognized that the armistice on the ground did not prevent human rights violations, stop arrests or end the displacement of refugees.

“FUTURE GOALS”

On top of these core goals, which no longer include broader objectives such as “taking out Iran,” as was the case during the Trump administration, Blinken set a long-term goal, which is reaching a “political settlement” as the only way for reconciliation, peace and the reconstruction of Syria.

At this point, it must be noted that an expanded paragraph was added to the final statement of the Rome meeting. In it, ministers recalled the importance of a political solution to the Syria crisis in line with UN Security Council Resolution 2254. They expressed strong support for UN Special Envoy Geir Pedersen.

Participants also strongly insisted on the need to renew and expand the UN Security Council’s authorization for cross border deliveries to Syria as an essential humanitarian lifeline for millions of Syrians, as well as continuing support for a nationwide ceasefire, fighting all forms of terrorism, and backing the work of the Constitutional Committee.

“We welcomed UN Special Envoy Geir Pedersen’s briefing and reaffirmed strong support for UN-led efforts to implement all aspects of UN Security Council Resolution 2254, including continued support for an immediate nationwide ceasefire, the unimpeded and safe delivery of aid, and the Constitutional Committee, as well as fighting against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations,” said the statement.

“Reaffirming the unity and territorial integrity of Syria, we remain committed to continue working actively to reach a credible, sustainable, and inclusive political solution based on Resolution 2254. This is the only solution that will bring an end to Syria’s decade-long conflict and guarantee the security of the Syrian people and fulfill their aspirations.” It added.

Arab ministers who partook in the Rome meeting found consensus on supporting a political settlement according to the parameters of Resolution 2254 and other relevant resolutions.

However, they warned that the absence of an effective international will to resolve the crisis had allowed some parties to implement expansionist, sectarian, and demographic change projects to change Syria’s identity.

This, according to the Arab ministers, protracted the Syrian crisis and its regional and international effects.

Arab ministers also reviewed the need to achieve stability and combat terrorism in southern Syria and the importance of removing Iran-affiliated militias affiliated there.

They highlighted the need to restore the role played by Arab countries in Syria. Still, They reminded that the consensus needed for Damascus returning to its seat at the Arab League does not currently exist.

Moreover, Washington’s “Caesar Act” limits the possibilities of Arab states contributing to reconstruction in Syria. Any help needs to remain limited to humanitarian and medical affairs.

For now, the US position is to hold out on Pedersen’s “step for step” proposal, which stipulates forming an international-regional contact group for Syria. It is also centered around urging Arab countries to wait on the “normalization of ties” with Damascus by reminding them of the imposed sanctions and the need for accountability.

Any move by Washington will be pending the results of the US-Russia meeting in Geneva, the outcomes of the “Astana Talks” slotted for July 7, and the UN Security Council’s vote on cross-border aid delivery before July 10.



What Is the ‘Shiite Duo’s’ Problem with Salam’s Appointment as Lebanon’s PM?

Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam waves as he arrives to meet with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (not pictured) at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, 14 January 2025. (EPA)
Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam waves as he arrives to meet with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (not pictured) at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, 14 January 2025. (EPA)
TT

What Is the ‘Shiite Duo’s’ Problem with Salam’s Appointment as Lebanon’s PM?

Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam waves as he arrives to meet with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (not pictured) at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, 14 January 2025. (EPA)
Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam waves as he arrives to meet with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (not pictured) at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, 14 January 2025. (EPA)

Several observers have questioned the strong opposition by the “Shiite duo” of Hezbollah and the Amal movement of the appointment of Nawaf Salam as Lebanon’s prime minister.

Head of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc MP Mohammed Raad went so far on Monday to declare that the party had been “deceived with the aim of creating division and exclusion” in the country.

Salam was named prime minister on Monday after earning 84 votes from parliamentary blocs. His predecessor Najib Mikati received nine, while the Shiite duo abstained from naming anyone.

Back in 2023, the duo had agreed to a so-called “French initiative” that suggested the election of Hezbollah and Amal’s candidate Suleiman Franjieh as president in exchange for Salam to be named prime minister.

Salam, who in February 2024 was named head of the International Court of Justice, boasts a long history of opposing Israel, which should have earned him Hezbollah’s strong support. He resigned from the post after being designated prime minister.

Figures close to the duo said that one of the issues Hezbollah has with Salam is that since the October 2019 anti-government protests in Lebanon, he has been viewed as the opposition and West’s candidate for the position of prime minister.

Political anlayst Dr. Kassem Kassir told Asharq Al-Awsat that Hezbollah and Amal don’t view Salam as a rival as they had agreed to his nomination in line with the French initiative.

The problem, however, lies in how he was nominated. He explained that internal and foreign forces had reached an agreement that would see Joseph Aoun elected president and Mikati named prime minister, he said.

However, it appears that some sort of internal and foreign “coup” had taken place and that led to Salam’s nomination and appointment, he remarked.

On whether the dispute can be resolved, Kassir said “positive stances” during the government formation process may tackle the issue.

“The Shiite duo fear that there may be an agenda aimed at excluding its influential role in political life,” he added.

A handout photo made available by the Lebanese Presidency Press Office shows Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (L) speaking with Lebanese parliament Speaker Nabih Berri (R) during a meeting at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, 14 January 2025. (Lebanese Presidency Press Office)

Hezbollah had warned on Monday that Salam’s government may be “unconstitutional” should it fail to meet its demands and aspirations.

Raad said: “We have the right to demand the formation of a constitutional government. A government that violates joint coexistence is not legal.”

Constitutional expert Dr. Saeed Malek said “constitutionality” is one of the foundations of Lebanon’s political system.

The constitution clearly states that there can be no legitimacy to an authority that violates mutual coexistence, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

However, the issue of “constitutionality” must not be brought up when a certain party wants to deliver a political message and prevent the remaining parties from building a state and practicing their rights, he stressed.

“Yes, the Shiite duo does represent Shiites in Lebanon, but they don’t represent all Lebanese Shiites. The community boasts figures who enrich the Shiite sect, so a government can be formed with them,” Kassir said.

“A government would be unconstitutional if not a single Shiite figure is represented in it,” he underlined.

On whether the government needs the vote of confidence of the Shiite MPs, he said the constitution does not stipulate that a cabinet needs the vote of all segments. “It simply says that it needs the vote of confidence,” he added.

“At the end of the day, the issue of ‘constitutionality’ is a right, but one must not exploit this right with the aim to obstruct state functioning and the formation of a government,” Malek stressed.

“No party has the right to obstruct a new presidential term under the pretext of ‘constitutionality’,” he stated.