-
Passport
Syria’s Lung-Eating Rebel Explains
-
Transitions
Is Venezuela Becoming a Failed State?
-
The Cable
Issa Subpoenas Pickering on Benghazi
Posted By Marc Lynch
Thursday, July 14, 2011 - 6:19 PM
Share
"I have seen no evidence yet in terms of hard changes on the ground that the Syrian government is willing to reform at anything like the speed demanded by the street protestors. If it doesn’t start moving with far greater alacrity, the street will wash them away."
That was the blunt verdict offered by U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford in a wide-ranging telephone interview with Foreign Policy today. Ford sharply criticized the Syrian government's continuing repression against peaceful protestors and called on President Bashar al-Assad to "take the hard decisions" to begin meaningful reforms before it is too late. Not, Ford stressed, because of American concerns but because of the impatience of the Syrian opposition itself. "This is not about Americans, it is about the way the Syrian government mistreats its own people," Ford stressed repeatedly. "This is really about Syrians interacting with other Syrians. I’m a marginal thing on the sidelines. I’m not that important."
Some might disagree. Last Thursday and Friday, Ford made a dramatic visit to the embattled city of Hama to demonstrate the United States' support for peaceful protests and its condemnation of the Syrian government's use of violence. His trip to Hama electrified supporters of the Syrian opposition, and marked a sharp escalation in U.S. efforts to deal with the difficult Syrian stalemate. It also sparked a vicious Syrian response, as government-backed mobs attacked the U.S. Embassy in Damascus, inflicting considerable damage. In a caustic note posted to his Facebook page, Ford called on the Syrian government to "stop beating and shooting peaceful demonstrators." Ford's sharp criticism of the Syrian government's violence against peaceful protestors and detailed outline of multilateral and American diplomatic efforts to pressure the Syrian regime suggest that the recent U.S. rhetorical escalation does mark a new stage in the ongoing crisis.
Ford warned that the Syrian government still failed to understand the depth and extent of the changes in their country. "They need to begin a really serious transition and not just talk or make promises," and to grant real political freedoms and to begin taking apart the oppressive and unaccountable security apparatus. While acknowledging that some Syrian gestures towards reform were significant within the local context, he dismissed most of the regime's reform proposals as "irrelevant." The Syrian government could not be credible while it continued to violently repress peaceful marches or to arrest a kid for spraying anti-regime graffiti -- in the eyes of its own people, regardless of what outsiders like the U.S. might think. The Syrian government "is not even close to meeting those demands. That is a genuine problem."
While the situation in Syria today may look like a stalemate, Ford sees it as far more dynamic beneath the surface. Compared to only a few months ago, the opposition has expanded and organized impressively, and has demonstrated phenomenal courage and remained largely non-violent. In part he chose Hama for his dramatic outing because "people in Hama over the last two months have been very conspicuous in avoiding violence." He noted that while touring Hama he saw nearly a dozen government buildings, unguarded, with only two broken windows on one building. Compare that, he wryly noted, to the extensive damage to his Embassy inflicted by the regime's thugs.
The Syrian people have broken the fear barrier, he argued, and now people are speaking more freely. Syria is changing, and the government needs to recognize that and respond appropriately rather than continuing in a futile effort to resist change through force. He marveled at the impact of satellite television and the Internet, which have dramatically shaped the worldviews and expectations of young Syrians. They simply will not accept what earlier generations did, and have already demonstrated powerfully that they will not shut up in the face of threats of violence. That is why Ford repeatedly deferred questions about specific political demands: "It's not an American decision. What we will not do is to claim to speak for them. They are capable of speaking for themselves."
But thus far, the Syrian regime has chosen to violently crack down on peaceful protests across the country, and has not made the kind of reforms which might have at an earlier point saved the regime. I asked Ford when the Syrian regime's violence would cross the line, when the repression and violence might have gone too far for any peaceful transition to be possible. "That's really not a question for Americans," he responded. "It's a question for the Syrian opposition, a lot of whom are quite tough. I've met enough of them, and believe me, they are a lot tougher than anyone in the Washington Post or the U.S. Senate. They know exactly what they are doing. I have talked to people who have lost immediate family, who have been killed or jailed. Nothing focuses the mind like that."
Ford dismissed the idea that prior to Hama he had been a captive in his Embassy, unable to engage with anyone. Quite the contrary. He has had access to both the Syrian government and to key sectors of Syrian society such as the business community. The threat of violent retaliation and intimidation of Syrians who meet with American officials is real, though, and he acknowledged that some had refused invitations out of this fear. Senior administration officials have told me several times in other conversations that Ford's conversations were one of their most important sources of information in assessing the Syrian scene. This is one key reason why they considered his presence essential even before his electrifying visit to Hama persuaded most of their critics of his value.
Ford waved away suggestions that he might rein in his activities in the face of official pressure. "I’m not going to stop the things I do," he said quietly. "I can’t. The president has issued very clear guidance. It’s morally the right thing to do." He plans to take further trips around the country, to continue to meet with as many Syrians as he can, and to push to open political space and to restrain regime violence. He doesn't think that the Obama administration will recall him, and has no indication as yet whether the Syrian government will expel him.
For now, he sees his role as doing what he can to open political space for the Syrian people to push their own demands for political freedoms, restraints on an unaccountable and anachronistic security apparatus, and a meaningful political transition. The United States, he emphasizes, is not supporting any specific Syrian opposition movement or personality. Nor is it endorsing a specific transition plan, a move which he believes would reproduce the mistakes made by the Bush administration in Iraq in 2004. The process "has to move at Syrian speed, not at a speed set in Washington, London or Brussels."
His emphasis on the role of the Syrian people and on multilateral action reflects the general approach of the Obama administration to this year's Arab upheavals. Ford refused to put the United States at the center of what is fundamentally a Syrian uprising for political rights, or to substitute an American transition plan for the ideas developed by the Syrian opposition itself. He refuses, wisely in my view, to make an Arab story about America -- even as he works tirelessly behind the scenes to construct effective action in support of popular demands. "This is a Syrian decision, not an American one. We will certainly encourage the Syrian people to demand their rights." That includes continuing to work multilaterally with Europeans and with Syria's neighbors, to coordinate targeted sanctions on people in the regime responsible for repression, and to push the Security Council to take on the issue.
The goal is to create a "space for genuine politics and free expression without the threat of violence." That remains an ambiguous and even murky endpoint in an increasingly violent and polarized environment. While he declined to answer the question of whether such an outcome was possible with the Asad regime in power, it is difficult at this point to see how it could be. That decision will ultimately be one for the Syrian people, not for the United States, Ford repeatedly stressed. But as the Obama administration's rhetoric sharpens and actions follow suit, it may become more and more difficult to maintain that balance.
"New wine must be poured into new wineskins”
I got to give credit to the ambassador. If it wasn’t for his courageous visit to Hama on July 8, a new massacre could have taken place.
But the ambassador still believes that the Syrian regime can be reformed, a notion with which I disagree:
Former ambassador to Syria T. Kattouf had the same theory . He advocated, full engagement with the regime in a manner which will break its alliance with Iran and promote peace in the area . He never had illusions about the regime, though , and always realized that “The Syrian regime cares first and foremost for its survival” (his article of July10, 2008 at CG).
But i think (his interview in Al Hurra TV on July 11) that he is convinced now that the regime will never change .
The regime believes that its very survival is dependent on the continuation of its historical strategy, which pillars are :
1-The State of “No peace and No war” with Israel guarantees appeasement of the west, and the continued massing of the Syrian people behind it against Israel and the West . Notice that its counter attack against the peaceful revolution is based on the myth that there is an imperialist – reactionary conspiracy to punish it for its resistance to the West, …..
2- The regime’s survival is linked to the success of the “Resistance crescent” (Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon).
3- Fear, oppression, and stagnation are essential for survival as well.
The Syrian protestors do not call for military action or collective economic sanctions against the regime, but a clear declaration that the regime has lost “its legitimacy” (and not “legitimacy”, like Madam Clinton stated) , and the transfer of the entire file to the international criminal courts are warranted .Since the regime declared that a third party has committed the atrocities, it has nothing to worry about.
Syrians are not revenge oriented people, but justice must be served
Mr. Adnan,
Allow me to mention that your comment reflects the fairest assessment of the Syrian situation insofar. The regime's demise remains inevitable, precisely for the three elements stated above, which were primarily played by the regime to ensure deflecting problems rooted domestically towards broader issues, whether on the regional or international levels.
The desperate attempts by the embattled regime to incite so-called "conspiracy, imperialism", and their outdated ilk can buy additional time over the short-term, yet they will definitely crumble in the face of domestic issues that have been boiling for decades.
Anyway, Mr. Ford interview confirms the Obama administration approach of striking a delicate balance between upholding protesters' cause and applying pressure, albeit gently, on Assad's regime. After all, the clock is ticking for Mr. Assad, whose throne is living on a borrowed time.
P.S: Upon reading other Syrian commentators, one can only wonder the mediocre quality and typos in comments left by users residing in Canada as well as neighbouring USA.
US administration should stand on the right side of History...
Facts:
- Asad has killed more then Qaddafi
- yesterday Syria official accused Ambassador Ford of smuggling equipments to armed groups when he visited Hama
- a day earlier Syrian Moallem threatens to restrict Ford
- Asad regime already declare that Asad stay is a victory for terrorist groups and extremism
Therefore, US admin should stand on the right side of history and say "Asad lost legitimacy and should step down".
While I appreciate the information conveyed in some of the comments here, Amb. Ford's responsibility is to represent the United States. He has wisely recognized the limits of his ability to chart a course for Syria, while acting both to make clear what American preferences are and gather information the American government can use to inform the development of future policy.
That Ford and his embassy staff are working under difficult conditions, subject to outrages that call to mind the record of the Syrian government's great friends in Tehran, is testimony to their skill and courage. I cannot forego pointing out that it is also, by implication, an indictment of the American Senate, which refused to act on Ford's nomination to be ambassador to Syria and forced President Obama to make a recess appointment valid only until the end of the current session of Congress.
Ford is no Saint... nor do the people within Syria care for him or his opinion...
You say it ignited the opposition but in fact it ignited everyone in Syria.
They were pissed all over and livid at the fact that a man that is not Syrian rome to Hama give his opinion and think they cared.
In fact I know my friends of the Opposition were VERY angry that he would undermine what they were trying to do.
Syrian people have never been fond of the USA government and it does not appease ppl to join the movement to see his man think we need him or supporting us.
He thought his visit would helped out opposition it didnt. Arab approval rating of Obama is LOWER THAN BUSH! because they wont mind their own business.
We a reform process and a dialogue was about to start 2 days laster, his trip was unprofessional, undermining what the govt is truly trying to do. He supported an opposition. IF HE CARED ABOUT DEMOCRACY AND SPEEDING UP REFORM IN SYRIA THEN WHY DIDNT HE ATTEND THE DIALOGUE CONFERENCE TO SEE IF IT WAS LEGIT OR NOT??
He did no such thing. He just goes to hama meets with opposition and talks crap about the government.
he mentions govt buildings only having 2 windows knocked out? Why was he looking if USA's stance as ALWAYS been peaceful protestors? Wouldnt that mean he knows that there has been non- peaceful? And the building were unguarded because there is no security in the City but yet he phrases his sentence perfectly to make it out to be the truth.. great politician.
He talks about the protestors as if they have grown in masses and that they r the majority. When that is not the case. Protests have actually minimized and support for reform under Bashar is what is the majority.
With an obvious media campaign against Syria, people continue to get pissed that the truth is not getting revealed. But us Syrians have our heads up high because together we r going to make a better Syria.
The lies have not killed our spirit nor made us run from those trying to destroy our country.
That one hour every friday we have dealt with, then we are back dealing with our live as usual. and when the reforms are finalized hopefully we will have that hour back as well.
Syriandeer mentality is similar to Asad's. Asad calls civilian demonstrations "terrorist armed gang" while same time Asad takes pride of supporting real terrorist groups such as hizbollah...
or similar to comical Sally, spokeswomen for Asad regime, who claimed that the 12000 syrians fled to Turkey are visiting their moms
let free media into syria before u speak about media campaigns...
Ambassador Ford's visit to Hama can be understood in one of the following two ways:
1. Either it is an American desperate attempt to regain some or the long lost credibility in the Syrian street, be it dissidents or loyalists,
2. or it is an American desperate attempt to convince the American people that their government cares about the rights of the Syrian people.
Both cases mean that the US does not care about the revolution in Syria and proves not to be willing to change its mentality of trying to hunt for political heroism in any possible place of the World for free. If the US really wanted to do a single right thing to support the Syrian revolt, they had better withdraw their ambassador in Syria rather than send him on "humanist" trips around the country, something that I have never thought would be the role of an ambassador anywhere.
The Urbanist (Abul Jawaher)
It has never failed for me to wonder how incompetent and repressive regimes still manage to retain the loyalty of educated people like Syriandeer.
The Baa'th Party is a sinister joke in Syia with the majority of professional people living in fear of it - it s something like living in Stalinist Russia during the 50's.
The Baa'th Party cannot reform Syria. Why? Two reasons.
1. It does not have the will or capability to do so.
2. It undestands nothing but repression.
In the few years I lived there many people went in fear of disappearing one night, with spies everywhere, and expatriates, such as myself, also having to be careful who and how we spoke to people.
During my tenure there 3 senior expats were given their marching orders.
In one meeting I had, 8 of the 10 Syrian business people in the room had been imprisoned, two of them for over 15 years.
Everyone knows of the destruction of Hama, but not that the army went into Aleppo the second city and the battles raged for 2 weeks prior to them attacking Hama with both armoured corps and the air force.
At the other end of the spectrum Syria, a beauiful country, will never reach economic sustainability under the Baa'th Party due to their inbuilt corruption, and the fact that no economic decisions can be made without their consent, not even to simply form a professional organization.
Where will Syria go?
I do not know, but I do know that these brave people deserve much better government and leadership than they have had for the past 40 years.
It's true that some people do not like the current regime in Syria, but they don't like the AMERICAN REGIME either.
It's true that some demonstrators are peaceful, but it's also true that others are armed people who are vandalising gov buildings spreading terror.
It's true that some protestors call for more reforms and freedoms, but it's aslo a fact that some mottos are also worrying for patriots because they are simply sectarian exactly like the comments of "canadian deer"
Although some of the civillians who have been killed were peaceful demonstrators(especially in the beginning of the events), quite a lot of those killed are "armed thugs" trying to kill army and police members.
I am a Syrian citizen living in Syria> The media is not always right( quite often wrong) because they see things through remote cameras or maybe they see things the way they want them to be. Mr Ford has been to Hama which is relatively peaceful in terms of demnstrating, but how i wish he had been to Jissr Al shgour when a horrible genocide was committed against the security forces there.
The truth is there is a big opposition on the ground but there is also a great number of people who trust the leadership and Mr president Assad. were not for their wisdom the country would be now like a volcano where people kill one another in a terrible civil war. We would be like Lybia, but thanks to our strong army everything is under control. This army do not kill peaceful civillians like the media try to say. They , like any other army in the world, try to keep peace, stability and fight any form of rebel. We Syrians in general want security. We do not want to be another Iraq. The mosaic in Syria is almost the same as Iraq so if chaos takes place, Syria is destroyed for i don't how long and this "Arab spring" will be a terminating fire of a long long hot summer.
He talks about the protestors as if they have grown in masses and that they r the majority. When that is not the case. Protests have actually minimized and support for reform under Bashar is what is the majority.With an obvious media campaign against Syria, people continue to get pissed that the truth is not getting Stávkové kancelárie revealed. But us Syrians have our heads up high because together we r going to make a better Syria.The lies have not killed our spirit nor made us run from those trying to destroy our country.That one hour every friday we have dealt with, then we are back dealing with our live as usual. and when the reforms are finalized hopefully we will have that hour back as well.
Everyone knows of the destruction of Hama, but not that the army went into Aleppo the second city and the battles raged for 2 weeks prior to them attacking Hama with both armoured corps and the air force.At the other end of the spectrum Syria, a beauiful country, will never reach economic sustainability under sázkové tipy the Baa'th Party due to their inbuilt corruption, and the fact that no economic decisions can be made without their consent, not even to simply form a professional organization.
Democracy is not the majority rule- its the majority vote. Since you are a 'canadian syria' I assume u do not realize that the majority vote today and tomorrow will go for Bashar... Even though majority is Sunni, many sunnis dont look at marcin gortat him as a alawi ruling and repressing Sunnis. Syria is secular and the country does not force anyone to practice any religion.
Reforms are coming under the hand of Bashar and he will lead Syria to a better nations.
Both cases mean that the US does not care about the revolution in Syria and proves not to be willing to change its mentality of trying to hunt for political heroism in any possible place of the World for free. If the US really wanted to do a sázky single right thing to support the Syrian revolt, they had better withdraw their ambassador in Syria rather than send him on "humanist" trips around the country, something that I have never thought would be the role of an ambassador anywhere.
Since September 11th, pundits, politicians, and intelligence agents have been demanding more HUMINT, or human intelligence, assets. The failure of the CIA to penetrate al Qaeda prevented the intelligence community from gathering vital HUMINT on bin Laden’s activities. Similarly, America’s reliance on technology (satellites, photographs, etc.) at the cost of developing HUMINT has led to damaging embarrassments like our inability to find stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Our Man in Damascus recounts the classic story of an Israeli spy who epitomizes HUMINT, showing how much potential it holds, how vital it is for security, and how dangerous and difficult it is to maintain.
The Israeli spy agency, Mossad.. as the late David Atlee Phillips points out in his memoirs, The Night Watch, is because the Mossad only has to operate in one region of the world: the Middle East. The CIA, MI6, and other agencies, on the other hand, are tasked with gathering intelligence and conducting operations throughout the world. Nonetheless, Our Man in Damascus shows just how effective the Mossad’s regional capabilities are. The book’s focus, Elie Cohn, was such an effective agent because both he and the agency were willing to take enormous risks. A “risk-averse” culture in the CIA has, in contrast, been blamed for the agency’s failures in the Global War on Terrorism.
That's only a few points I and my friend, jada fire have on mind.
People in Hama desperately needed somebody to stop the massacre that was about to hit them at the hands of the Syrian regime, Ford was the do-gooder, thanks for that first. Second,
if Ford or the US administration is really serious about expecting reform by the regime then that would be a disaster. A police state cannot reform, it is a death sentence they will never accept it. The security bosses are qualified according to their loyalty to the tori black
. If he punishes those loyal to him he would be sending the wrong message they will turn against him. Fact is the US has a single interest that is the interest of Israel which prefers Assad for the unkonwn or a popular leader who would get the Golan back in no time. Israel has no chance at all if Egypt and Syria were democratic, because we really know the enemy within and the enemy without.
Marc Lynch is associate professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(15)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE