Tricky Game: US fails its promises to the rebels, while Israel gets more involved against Assad – Media Roundup on Syria (17/02/2013)

‎ Does the USA have an interest in prolonging the violence in Syria? This is the focus of a report in ‎World News. According to the report there had been several meetings between Syrian opposition ‎figures and CIA figures in the city of Gaziantep. In such meetings, support was promised to the ‎rebels. In fact, […]


Does the USA have an interest in prolonging the violence in Syria? This is the focus of a report in ‎World News. According to the report there had been several meetings between Syrian opposition ‎figures and CIA figures in the city of Gaziantep. In such meetings, support was promised to the ‎rebels. In fact, the Americans introduced themselves as being willing to help overthrow Assad. ‎Since the question of weapons was a difficult matter, Americans made the promise to provide the ‎rebels with medical supplies and satellite phones. However, none of these promises have been ‎fulfilled. One opposition figure cut off his good ties to the CIA because he was losing credibility ‎amongst rebels. He said that “The Americans are using the lies to get information. If you ask any ‎rebel in Syria right now, he will say America is our enemy.” Another sign for American and ‎Turkish approval to balance the Assad’s power are weapon transports over the border from ‎Turkey to Syria. These weapons supplies are always short supply, as one of the smugglers ‎assures: “They give us 10 bullets so that when we run out we have to come back for more. If they ‎gave us 20, we could advance, but they don’t want that”.‎

Meanwhile the EU needs to decide by the end of February on lifting sanctions for weapon ‎supplies to the Syrian opposition. While Britain is in favor of supporting the opposition militarily, ‎other EU states are more reluctant to do so as they fear more weapons could prolong the conflict. ‎Although France seemed to be more willing to support the British plan, it seems to be more ‎reluctant now while Germany is assumed to counter such an approach. One solution might be ‎that the EU will to send “non-deadly weapons” such as for example night sensing equipment.‎

Alia Ahmed calls for legal reforms on women’s right in any future Syrian government. She ‎criticizes the constitution which was drafted shortly after the beginning of the revolution and ‎underwent several changes while still not considering women’s rights. The first point are honour ‎killings. Therby the murderer should not stay longer than one year in prison. These laws facilitate ‎and encourage honour killings. Indeed, it discourages girls to report rape and sexual violence out ‎of fear from being killed by their families. Since the beginning of the crisis in Syria, Sexual ‎violence is said to have increased. Second, the possibility of marital rape which is not against the ‎current law must be overcome. Third, she calls for the reform of women’s citizenship rights ‎which currently deny children of a Syrian mother and a foreign father the Syrian nationality. ‎

Israel decided to help Syrians who were wounded and close to the border. Thereby it went ‎against its ‎normal policy of not letting any Syrian refugees in. In fact, Netanyahu said Israel will ‎continue its ‎policy apart from “exceptional cases”. Yet there are no available information on the ‎well-being of the ‎Syrians and whether they are civilians or armed groups.‎

Analysing these events, Patrick Seale points to three important developments which will have a ‎large impact on Syria. First, the presence of radical Islamist groups causes increased concern ‎among the US and the West. Indeed, it seems paradox that the West is willing to fight Islamist ‎groups in several countries, such as Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia and Mali while letting it gain ‎more power in Syria, thus making them an important player in the Post-Assad era.‎
A second development is the splitting of the Syrian opposition and Moez Al-Khatibs offer to ‎negotiate with the regime which was criticized heavily by the Muslim Brotherhood. On the other ‎hand, Khatib’s offer also gained support as it is seen as the only way out of this conflict.‎
A third determining factor is Israel’s role. Israel’s attack on Syrian soil is seen as an attempt to ‎provoke the so-called “axis of evil” – Syria, Hisbollah, iran- in order to launch a greater assault. ‎Israel is increasingly concerned about developments between the west and Middle eastern states, ‎especially about a probable dialogue between Iran and the US. It would be more in Israel’s ‎interest to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and bring down this regime as was the case in Iraq. ‎Similar to that, it has no interest in Syrian peace. A dismembered Syria is much more in Israel’s ‎interest. Concluding, the author highlights the important role of President Barack Obama and his ‎team. It will partly depend on their decision to follow Israel’s interest as was done in Iraq or to ‎engage in negotiations which might contribute to a peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis. ‎