Damascus ‘Thwarts’ Settlement as it Eyes Reconstruction

UN special envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen holds a press conference at the United Nations Offices in Geneva. (AFP)
UN special envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen holds a press conference at the United Nations Offices in Geneva. (AFP)
TT

Damascus ‘Thwarts’ Settlement as it Eyes Reconstruction

UN special envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen holds a press conference at the United Nations Offices in Geneva. (AFP)
UN special envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen holds a press conference at the United Nations Offices in Geneva. (AFP)

Damascus is set to host in the coming hours United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Martin Griffiths.

UN special envoy, Geir Pedersen, meanwhile, is being made to wait for an invitation to visit the Syrian capital as it mulls its priorities for the coming phase. Damascus will welcome international aid and push forward the implementation of the UN resolution on cross-border aid with its new phrasing. The resolution was extended in early July.

Damascus is setting its sights on the reconstruction and relief funds, while delaying negotiations over a political settlement and the UN-sponsored talks in Geneva related to the constitutional committee.

In July, the United States and Russia reached a “historic settlement” that was extension of the cross-border aid resolution. Washington was forced to make concessions over the duration of the resolution and the finer details an accept Moscow’s introduction of new phrasing to the resolution.

The resolution now speaks of “early recovery”. The resolution reads: “The Security Council welcomes all efforts and initiatives to broaden the humanitarian activities in Syria, including water, sanitation, health, education, and shelter early recovery projects, undertaken by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and other organizations, and calls upon other international humanitarian agencies and relevant parties to support them.”

“The Security Council requests the Secretary-General to brief the Council monthly and (…) to include in his reports overall trends in United Nations cross-line operations, in particular on the implementation of the above mentioned activities on improving all modalities of humanitarian deliveries inside Syria and early recovery projects, and detailed information on the humanitarian assistance delivered through United Nations humanitarian cross-border operations, including the distribution mechanism, the number of beneficiaries, operating partners, locations of aid deliveries at district-level and the volume and nature of items delivered.”

Griffiths’ meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal al-Miqdad in the coming hours will be an opportunity for Damascus to offer its interpretation of the resolution and its priorities in regards to “cross-line” operations between the three zones of influence inside Syria and the contributions to the “early recovery projects” that take the country closer to reconstructions.

Damascus will likely also pressure Griffiths to take a clearer position on the “unilateral” western sanctions and Ankara’s closure of a water pumping station east of the Euphrates River.

Damascus’ stances are pushing it closer from those of Moscow and Tehran that stand in contrast to Washington and the West that are prioritizing cross-border aid. The US and western countries view the aid as a matter of life or death and have accused Damascus of obstructing deliveries of aid to northeastern regions that are held by Washington’s allies.

Furthermore, western countries refuse to take part in any reconstruction project in Syria before making sure that irreversible progress is achieved in the political process. This position implicitly agrees that sanctions, isolation and pledges to contribute in reconstruction are “means to pressure” Damascus to make internal and geopolitical concessions.

The clash in positions between Damascus and the West over aid will not extend to the political arena as the government continues to refuse to welcome Pedersen despite Russia’s intervention to facilitate such a visit.

Damascus is “angry” with the envoy for helping mediate a meeting between Daraa representatives and his issuing of a statement expressing his concern over the deteriorating situation there. It is also upset with the way negotiations have been held with the head of the government delegation to the constitutional committee talks in Geneva. The negotiations have focused on the agreement on the working mechanism of the committee and working paper that the envoy had presented at the beginning of the year.

Pedersen, meanwhile, wants to head to Damascus to “negotiate” over the UN constitutional mechanism. In April, he had sent a document to government delegation head, Ahmed al-Kuzbari, and opposition “negotiations committee” delegation head, Hadi al-Bahra, tackling the steps to kick off the committee’s work in drafting the constitution. Bahra agreed to the document despite his reservations, while Kuzbari had instead proposed discussing the constitution rather than draft it.

President Bashar Assad had made his position clear over the drafting of the constitution during his swearing in ceremony in July. He said: “You have proven once again the unity of the battle of the constitution and nation. You have proven that the constitution is a priority that is not open to debate or compromise.”

He said that efforts to draft the new constitution aim to put the country “at the mercy of foreign forces”, citing “Turkish agents” at the committee talks – a reference to the opposition negotiations committee delegation.

Moscow will be pleased with Damascus’ presentation to Griffiths of its interpretation of the aid resolution extension.

Sights are now set on Moscow to act to persuade Damascus to welcome Pedersen, who had recently met with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Russia. Perhaps he would meet with Miqdad on the sidelines on the UN General Assembly in New York in September.



Will Israeli Strikes on Iran Negatively Impact Developments in Lebanon?

A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)
A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)
TT

Will Israeli Strikes on Iran Negatively Impact Developments in Lebanon?

A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)
A man walks past a mural painting of Iranian flags in a street in Tehran on October 26, 2024. (AFP)

It is too soon to tell how the latest Israeli strikes on Iran will impact the region, especially Lebanon. Officials in Lebanon have not yet determined whether the attacks will positively influence the fight between Israel and Hezbollah.

An official Lebanese source said that the United States’ ability to rein in Israel and prevent it from carrying out a strike against major Iranian facilities must not be tied to the developments in Lebanon.

In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, he explained that Israel’s insistence on its land incursion in Lebanon, occupation of Lebanese villages and its destructive air strikes across the country, demonstrate that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not tying the Lebanese front to any other, especially Iran.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source added that the future of the Israeli war on Lebanon is unpredictable, at least until the American presidential elections are held.

Israel had informed Iran of its intention to attack before it launched the strikes, proving that US President Joe Biden’s administration averted a widescale war in the region days before the elections on November 5.

Former Lebanese Ambassador to Washington Antoine Chedid said the American administration succeeded in persuading Netanyahu to strike Iran within the limits it had drawn up.

He ruled out the possibility that the limited strike would positively impact Lebanon.

Netanyahu is determined to achieve his goals in the war on Lebanon, which are to eliminate Hezbollah and establish security along the Lebanese-Israeli border to allow residents of northern Israeli settlements to return home, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Moreover, he noted that the US doesn’t really have a specific policy on Lebanon. Rather, it has a regional policy and Lebanon is part of it.

The American elections will establish a new equation in the region. Chedid said that Kamala Harris’ win will represent a continuation of Biden’s policies.

A win for Donald Trump will put the region in a different position, especially given that he is critical of calls for Netanyahu to end the war on Gaza and Lebanon, he went on to say.

Axios had quoted three Israeli sources as saying that Tel Aviv had warned Tehran of the impending strike and of what Israel was going to attack and what it wasn’t.

Director of Levant Institute for Strategic Affairs Dr. Sami Nader said the American limits to the Israeli strikes are aimed at preventing the region from slipping into a major war, which Washington wants to avoid, and at averting any negative effects on Harris’ electoral chances.

He told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel will continue to pressure Iran and Lebanon is the main arena where it will do so instead of launching attacks deep into Iran given that the US is largely ignoring the developments in Lebanon and has a major interest in seeing Hezbollah weakened.

Gaza, on the other hand, has become a sore point for Washington given the major destruction there and the massacres Israel has committed against the Palestinian people, he remarked.

Ultimately, the strikes against Iran are not the end of the road, continued Nader.

By not attacking Iranian oil, gas and nuclear facilities and thus avoiding a widescale war, Netanyahu gave Biden a positive boost and he probably earned more weapons for Israel in return, he explained.

This will not be the last Israeli strike on Iran, he warned.