Syrian Foreign Minister Mouallem on Iraq, etc
"The day after any military attack against Iran would be a disaster-- not just for the Middle East region, but for international stability." This was the clear warning I heard voiced by Syria's Foreign Minister, Walid al-Mouallem, during a 70-minute interview I conducted with him in Damascus on February 28.
I had asked Mr. Mouallem whether he had any fears of an imminent military attack against either his country, or Iran. "About Syria, I don't have any such fear," he said.
But regarding Iran, it's more
complicated. There is no logical analysis that could support the
idea of such illogical behavior. But honestly, no-one can claim
to predict the behavior of this American administration.
For example, they are saying all the time, 'All options are open', and they are mobilizing all these forces. No-one knows why!
And then, no-one knows what will happen the day after any attack on Iran. Especially, since the Americans didn't have any strategy for the day after the invasion of Iraq!
The day after any military attack against Iran would be a disaster-- not just for the Middle East region, but for international stability. Think of the effect on oil prices, and the effects that would have on Europe and Japan, and on the stability of the economies of all the Gulf countries. Think of the consequences of Iran's possible acts of retaliation against American interests worldwide. What would be the effects on the 'Global War on Terror'? What would happen to American soldiers in Iraq and in Afghanistan? These are the questions that need to be answered before there is any military decision.
I hope there will be no military decision. These differences can be solved through political means, through direct negotiations.
For example, they are saying all the time, 'All options are open', and they are mobilizing all these forces. No-one knows why!
And then, no-one knows what will happen the day after any attack on Iran. Especially, since the Americans didn't have any strategy for the day after the invasion of Iraq!
The day after any military attack against Iran would be a disaster-- not just for the Middle East region, but for international stability. Think of the effect on oil prices, and the effects that would have on Europe and Japan, and on the stability of the economies of all the Gulf countries. Think of the consequences of Iran's possible acts of retaliation against American interests worldwide. What would be the effects on the 'Global War on Terror'? What would happen to American soldiers in Iraq and in Afghanistan? These are the questions that need to be answered before there is any military decision.
I hope there will be no military decision. These differences can be solved through political means, through direct negotiations.
I asked his view of the meeting planned for Baghdad March 10, where a representative of the U.S. administration will sit down for the first time with representatives of both Syria and Iran. (The Iraqi government has invited all of its neighbors and all five members of the Security Council to this conference.)
Mouallem confirmed that his deputy would be attending the meeting. He added,
The idea of the meeting is to
rally the goodwill of the neighboring countries and to express support
for Iraq's security and stability. For Syria, it's our vital
interest to achieve security and stability in Iraq. In Syria, we
have more than a million displaced Iraqis. They are a real burden
on our economy, and on our education and healthcare systems.
We're not getting any support from anyone for this-- including the
Iraqi government.
This is a humanitarian issue, and it's increasing in gravity on a daily basis, because of the terrible security situation in Iraq.
He explained that because Syria hopes that these displaced persons
can speedily return to their homes in Iraq, his government is reluctant
to refer to them as refugees, calling them instead "displaced perople."This is a humanitarian issue, and it's increasing in gravity on a daily basis, because of the terrible security situation in Iraq.
Mouallem described the Bush administration's decision to attend the Baghdad conference as,
a partial step in the correct
direction. But it's not the full step we are expecting Washington
to reach to. The full step will be when the Americans decide to
have a comprehensive dialogue on regional issues, starting with the
Arab-Israeli issue, which is the core issue in the region.
Had he seen any signs yet that this was happening?
I haven't seen any yet. The only
positive signs we've seen from America have been the Baker-Hamilton
report and some signs coming from some of the members of the Senate and
Congress who have been visiting, and from some scholars.
I asked what policies Syria supported in order to
de-escalate the tensions in Iraq.I'm not a military man, but I read the
news daily. And I don't see any news from Iraq or Afghnaistan
that tells me the situation is good...
We speak about the need for an agreed timetable for a US withdrawal from Iraq-- agreed between the US and the Iraqi government.
This timetable would have two or three dimensions: One for the rebuilding of the Iraqi forces, with a timetable that allows Iraqi units to replace the foreign forces there. The second would be that it would provide a hope for the many Iraqis resisting occupation, to tell them not to use force because they could be sure that by a fixed date they would see the independence and unity of Iraq. So that would help the job of rebuilding the security forces. Thirdly, this would announce that it is a duty for the Iraqi forces and also for all of Iraq's neighbors to help assure this process.
We are not talking this way about a withdrawal in order to offend any party, but it's our thinking based on the realities there.
... No-one is thinking about imposing defeat on the US forces. On the contrary, we are trying to find an honorable withdrawal for them. Thus we say the timetable should be agreed with the Iraqi authorities. Of course, it must be a total withdrawal, since one of our central goals is to achieve Iraqi sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity, in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 1546.
He later declined an invitation to be more precise about the total
length of the timetable for the US withdrawal.We speak about the need for an agreed timetable for a US withdrawal from Iraq-- agreed between the US and the Iraqi government.
This timetable would have two or three dimensions: One for the rebuilding of the Iraqi forces, with a timetable that allows Iraqi units to replace the foreign forces there. The second would be that it would provide a hope for the many Iraqis resisting occupation, to tell them not to use force because they could be sure that by a fixed date they would see the independence and unity of Iraq. So that would help the job of rebuilding the security forces. Thirdly, this would announce that it is a duty for the Iraqi forces and also for all of Iraq's neighbors to help assure this process.
We are not talking this way about a withdrawal in order to offend any party, but it's our thinking based on the realities there.
... No-one is thinking about imposing defeat on the US forces. On the contrary, we are trying to find an honorable withdrawal for them. Thus we say the timetable should be agreed with the Iraqi authorities. Of course, it must be a total withdrawal, since one of our central goals is to achieve Iraqi sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity, in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 1546.
Syria's views on all these matters are of course extremely significant, given the country's pivotal position in the Middle East and given the fact that it enjoys good relations with not only the present government of Iraq but also many strands of the Iraqi opposition including many trends inside Iraq's Sunni-Arab society.
(Mouallem talked about a number of other important topics, too, including Lebanon and the Palestinian issue. I'll post more material from the interview on JWN as soon as I get the time. Now, I'm afraid I need to run to something else. By the way, I'm now back in Jordan.)
Comments
Comment from...
KDJ, at
March 14, 2007 05:32 PM:
EU Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana on his visit to Syria:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070314/wl_mideast_afp/mideasteusyrialebanon_070314182140