Secret Jordanian Document Proposes ‘Change in Behavior’ of Syrian Regime

The Syrian town of Douma on the outskirts of Damascus as seen on April 17, 2018. (AFP)
The Syrian town of Douma on the outskirts of Damascus as seen on April 17, 2018. (AFP)
TT

Secret Jordanian Document Proposes ‘Change in Behavior’ of Syrian Regime

The Syrian town of Douma on the outskirts of Damascus as seen on April 17, 2018. (AFP)
The Syrian town of Douma on the outskirts of Damascus as seen on April 17, 2018. (AFP)

A “secret” Jordanian document has proposed a new approach to dealing with the Syrian regime. The document puts in place steps that aim to achieve gradual change in behavior by the regime, leading up to the withdrawal of all foreign forces from the war-torn country and recognizing the “legitimate interests” of Russia there.

A senior western official, who read the document, confirmed that it was discussed between Arab leaders, including Jordan’s King Abdullah II, who tackled it with US President Joe Biden in Washington in July and Russian President Vladimir Putin in August.

The official told Asharq Al-Awsat that Jordan was encouraged to pursue its efforts in Syria after it received support from Washington over the extension of gas pipelines through Syria, Egypt and its own territories to Lebanon. It also received pledges that it will not come under sanctions in line with Caesar Act for working with Damascus.

Russia, meanwhile, exerted efforts to reach the recent settlement in the southern Syrian province of Daraa. The deal made sure that civilians would not seek asylum in Jordan and that Iran would not expand its influence in Daraa. In return, Jordan would reopen the border with Syria and officials would exchange visits to hold military, security and economic talks.

Last week, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal al-Mikdad held talks with his Egyptian, Jordanian and Tunisian counterparts. In contrast, the Syrian opposition practically held no meetings in New York.

On the Arab scene, consensus remains elusive over Damascus’ return to the Arab League. Its membership was suspended in 2012 in wake of the uprising and the regime’s violent crackdown on peaceful protesters. Arab countries are hinging Syria’s return on Damascus taking tangible steps in implementing the political solution in line with UN Security Council resolution 2254 and ensuring the withdrawal of foreign militias from its territories.

Multiple failures
The western official said the secret document stemmed from an assessment that the approach towards ending the Syrian conflict that was adopted in the past ten years has been a failure on all levels. As it stands, some 6.7 Syrians have fled their homes, 6.6 million are displaced and 13 million are in need of humanitarian aid and 80 percent of the population lives in poverty.

As for ISIS, it may have been defeated in March 2019, but the terrorist group may still regroup in various Syrian regions, including the desert (Badia) and southeastern region that borders Jordan.

The official revealed that the secret document also addresses Iran’s presence in Syria. It concluded that Tehran “enjoys growing military and economic influence over the regime and different regions in the country, especially the southwest”, where drugs smuggling – a main source of income for its militias – is rampant, posing a threat to the region and beyond.

New approach
Based on the above, the document proposes a new approach that could refocus attention on the political solution in Syria based on resolution 2254 and addressing the humanitarian crisis and its security impact on the country and the region. The approach would adopt a series of accumulative steps that would focus on “combating terrorism and containing Iran’s growing influence” with the ultimate goal being changing the behavior of the regime. In return, Damascus would be offered incentives that would reflect positively on the Syrian people and allow the return of refugees and the displaced, revealed the official.

These ideas align with those proposed by UN envoy Geir Pedersen, who had suggested a “step-for-step” approach towards Syria that would start with an American-Russian understanding that would identify these steps. These steps would then be backed by the region, Arab world and Europe before a mechanism is put in place for the regime to be implemented.

The western official said garnering Russia’s support for the new approach was fundamental, as was recognizing Moscow’s legitimate interests. There are hopes that cooperation could take place with Russia to determine the common points of interest so that efforts can move ahead towards the political solution and implementing resolution 2254.

Roadmap
Among the obstacles hindering the new approach is the division over how the regime would be involved. Another obstacle is the lack of Arab consensus over Syria’s return to the Arab League and lack of progress in the political solution based on resolution 2254. Another hurdle is the US and Europe’s commitment to pressure tools against Damascus: sanctions, isolation and funding the reconstruction. The Caesar Act is yet another obstacle.

To address some of these hurdles, it was suggested that Jordan test the waters with Damascus before expanding contacts with the regime. Experts have therefore, sought to draft an “executive roadmap” over how to achieve the “step-for-step” approach that would cover the abovementioned files and the necessary stance from Damascus over “changing the behavior of the regime”, the peace process, resolution 2254, the Constitutional Committee, Iran’s role and return of refugees.

A top priority at the moment appears the demand for “all non-Syrian forces to withdraw from the contact lines” and then the eventual pullout from the country of all foreign forces that deployed there after 2011. In return, American forces would withdraw from Syria and dismantle the al-Tanf base on the Syrian-Jordanian-Iraqi border, and channels of coordination would be opened between the Syrian army and security forces with their counterparts from neighboring countries to control border security.

The document did not include a timetable for its execution. It also did not include a stance on the Russian military presence in Syria even though it did recognize Moscow’s interests. It also did not address Damascus’ stance that the deployment of Iranian militias was based on its request, noted the western official.



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.