Damascus Expects More Normalization as Biden Administration Looks Elsewhere

Assad and his wife cast their vote during presidential elections in May. (SANA)
Assad and his wife cast their vote during presidential elections in May. (SANA)
TT
20

Damascus Expects More Normalization as Biden Administration Looks Elsewhere

Assad and his wife cast their vote during presidential elections in May. (SANA)
Assad and his wife cast their vote during presidential elections in May. (SANA)

While Bashar al-Assad is still shunned by the West, which blames him for a decade of brutal war in Syria, a shift is under way in the Middle East, where Arab allies of the United States are bringing him in from the cold by reviving economic and diplomatic ties, said a Reuters report on Monday.

The extension of Assad’s two-decade-old presidency in an election in May did little to break his pariah status among Western states, but fellow Arab leaders are coming to terms with the fact that he retains a solid grip on power, according to regional analysts, diplomats and former government officials.

The chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan and its preoccupation with China have firmed up a belief among Arab leaders that they need to chart their own course, these analysts and officials say.

When asked about the shift, the US State Department said there was no change to its Syria policy.

A department spokesperson said: “What we have not done and will not do is express any support for efforts to normalize or rehabilitate the brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad, lift a single sanction on Syria, or change our position to oppose the reconstruction of Syria until there is irreversible progress towards a political solution.”

Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal al-Mikdad told Syria’s al-Watan newspaper on Sunday: “I am optimistic that we will kick off deeper dialogues for our people. There is a greater realization among all parties that the current situation does not benefit anyone and that western plots threaten us all.”

He revealed that his recent meetings have included nine Arab foreign ministers, all of whom have felt that Syria’s absence from the Arab League “has harmed joint Arab work and that Syria must be part of the Arab body as soon as possible.”

Government officials in Damascus could not immediately be reached for comment on Syria’s relations with Arab states.

Political as well as economic considerations loom large in Arab capitals such as Cairo, Amman and Abu Dhabi. These include their ties with Assad’s most powerful backer, Russia, which has been pressing for Syria’s reintegration, and how to counter the influence carved out in Syria by Iran and Turkey.

Turkey and its support for factions across the region - including a swathe of northern Syria that remains outside Assad’s grasp - is of particular concern to Arab rulers who can make common cause with Damascus against Islamist groups, analysts say.

But while the signs of Arab rapprochement with Damascus are growing - King Abdullah of Jordan spoke to Assad for the first time in a decade this month - US policy will remain a complicating factor.

Washington says its policy still demands a political transition as set out in a Security Council resolution. US sanctions targeting Damascus, tightened under President Donald Trump, still pose a serious obstacle to commerce.

But in Washington, analysts say Syria has hardly been a foreign policy priority for President Joe Biden’s administration. They note his focus on countering China and that his administration has yet to apply sanctions under the so-called Caesar Act, which came into force last year with the intent of adding to the pressure on Assad.

After being warned against dealing with Damascus by the Trump administration, Arab states are pressing the issue again.

“US allies in the Arab world have been encouraging Washington to lift the siege on Damascus and allow for its reintegration into the Arab fold,” said David Lesch, a Syria expert at Trinity University in Texas. “It appears the Biden administration, to some degree, is listening.”

It marks a shift from the early years of the conflict when Syria was expelled from the Arab League and states backed some of the factions that fought Assad.

Breaking down barriers
The decade-long conflict, which spiraled out of a popular uprising against Assad during the so-called “Arab Spring”, has killed hundreds of thousands of people, uprooted half the population and forced millions into adjacent states and Europe as refugees.

Anti-Assad factions still have a foothold in the north, with support from Turkey, while the east and northeast is controlled by Kurdish-led forces backed by the United States.

But while the conflict is unresolved, Assad is back in control of most of Syria thanks largely to Russia and Iran, which were always more committed to his survival than Washington was to his removal, even when chemical weapons were fired on opposition areas.

Jordan, Syria’s neighbor to the south, has been leading the pack on the Arab policy shift.

It has repeatedly said it wants to improve ties with Syria. A Jordanian government spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the future course of its relations with Damascus.

The border between Syria and Jordan was fully reopened for trade last month, and Amman has been a driving force behind a deal to pipe Egyptian natural gas to Lebanon via Syria, with an apparent US nod of approval.

“When Jordan breaks these barriers and establishes ties and it’s at this pace, there will be countries that will follow suit,” Samih al-Maaytah, a former Jordanian minister and political analyst, told Al Mamlaka, a state-owned broadcaster.

The crossing was once plied by hundreds of trucks a day moving goods between Europe, Turkey and the Gulf. Reviving trade will be a shot in the arm for Jordan and Syria, whose economy is in deep crisis. It should also help Lebanon, now suffering one of the sharpest economic depressions in modern history.

“I’m absolutely sure the Jordanians feel that the US will not sanction them,” Jim Jeffrey, former US Special Envoy for Syria under Trump, told Reuters.

“There’s a tremendous buzz among media, among friends in the region, that the US is no longer aggressively sanctioning Assad under the Caesar Act or other things.”

The mood was reflected at last month’s UN General Assembly, where Egyptian and Syrian foreign ministers met for the first time in a decade, and at the Expo 2020 Dubai exhibition, where the Syrian and Emirati economy ministers discussed the revival of a bilateral business council.



Sudan's Relentless War: A 70-Year Cycle of Conflict


Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)
Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)
TT
20

Sudan's Relentless War: A 70-Year Cycle of Conflict


Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)
Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)

While world conflicts dominate headlines, Sudan’s deepening catastrophe is unfolding largely out of sight; a brutal war that has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and flattened entire cities and regions.

More than a year into the conflict, some observers question whether the international community has grown weary of Sudan’s seemingly endless cycles of violence. The country has endured nearly seven decades of civil war, and what is happening now is not an exception, but the latest chapter in a bloody history of rebellion and collapse.

The first of Sudan’s modern wars began even before the country gained independence from Britain. In 1955, army officer Joseph Lagu led the southern “Anyanya” rebellion, named after a venomous snake, launching a guerrilla war that would last until 1972.

A peace agreement brokered by the World Council of Churches and Ethiopia’s late Emperor Haile Selassie ended that conflict with the signing of the Addis Ababa Accord.

But peace proved short-lived. In 1983, then-president Jaafar Nimeiry reignited tensions by announcing the imposition of Islamic Sharia law, known as the “September Laws.” The move prompted the rise of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), led by John Garang, and a renewed southern insurgency that raged for more than two decades, outliving Nimeiry’s regime.

Under Omar al-Bashir, who seized power in a 1989 military coup, the war took on an Islamist tone. His government declared “jihad” and mobilized civilians in support of the fight, but failed to secure a decisive victory.

The conflict eventually gave way to the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, better known as the Naivasha Agreement, which was brokered in Kenya and granted South Sudan the right to self-determination.

In 2011, more than 95% of South Sudanese voted to break away from Sudan, giving birth to the world’s newest country, the Republic of South Sudan. The secession marked the culmination of decades of war, which began with demands for a federal system and ended in full-scale conflict. The cost: over 2 million lives lost, and a once-unified nation split in two.

But even before South Sudan’s independence became reality, another brutal conflict had erupted in Sudan’s western Darfur region in 2003. Armed rebel groups from the region took up arms against the central government, accusing it of marginalization and neglect. What followed was a ferocious counterinsurgency campaign that drew global condemnation and triggered a major humanitarian crisis.

As violence escalated, the United Nations deployed one of its largest-ever peacekeeping missions, the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID), in a bid to stem the bloodshed.

Despite multiple peace deals, including the Juba Agreement signed in October 2020 following the ousting of long-time Islamist ruler, Bashir, fighting never truly ceased.

The Darfur war alone left more than 300,000 people dead and millions displaced. The International Criminal Court charged Bashir and several top officials, including Ahmed Haroun and Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Alongside the southern conflict, yet another war erupted in 2011, this time in the Nuba Mountains of South Kordofan and the Blue Nile region. The fighting was led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu, head of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement–North (SPLM–N), a group composed largely of northern fighters who had sided with the South during the earlier civil war under John Garang.

The conflict broke out following contested elections marred by allegations of fraud, and Khartoum’s refusal to implement key provisions of the 2005 Naivasha Agreement, particularly those related to “popular consultations” in the two regions. More than a decade later, war still grips both areas, with no lasting resolution in sight.

Then came April 15, 2023. A fresh war exploded, this time in the heart of the capital, Khartoum, pitting the Sudanese Armed Forces against the powerful paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Now entering its third year, the conflict shows no signs of abating.

According to international reports, the war has killed more than 150,000 people and displaced around 13 million, the largest internal displacement crisis on the planet. Over 3 million Sudanese have fled to neighboring countries.

Large swathes of the capital lie in ruins, and entire states have been devastated. With Khartoum no longer viable as a seat of power, the government and military leadership have relocated to the Red Sea city of Port Sudan.

Unlike previous wars, Sudan’s current conflict has no real audience. Global pressure on the warring factions has been minimal. Media coverage is sparse. And despite warnings from the United Nations describing the crisis as “the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe,” Sudan's descent into chaos remains largely ignored by the international community.