With Damascus offering to restart the Israeli peace talks without any preconditions, Emad Fawzi Shueibi determines the US and Israeli response Terry Rod Larsen, the United Nations envoy for Middle East Affairs, hailed Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad's proclamation that Damascus is willing to resume negotiations with Israel without any preconditions as an important step forward on the road to peace. This Syrian move puts more than one party to the test. In Israel, the conflict is likely to resume between the political and military-security camps. The political camp, headed by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, refuses to negotiate with Damascus on the pretext that the Syrians are in a tight corner and should not be let out. The military-security camp is very much in favour of resuming talks, having even leaked details of progress made with Syria under Barak but blaming the latter for wasting that opportunity for peace with Damascus. Syria recognises the significance of a United States administration made up exclusively of neo-conservatives and right- wing extremists, now that the moderation of Colin Powell is gone. The Syrian willingness to resume negotiations, while driving the Israelis into a corner, has also put pressure on Washington. The nominated secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, has already pledged to revive the peace process -- particularly on the Palestinian track. But with Damascus's offer, sensible people in Washington -- there must still be some -- may just be enticed to consider the possibility of a breakthrough on the Syrian track. It is hard to guess what goes on in Washington because opinions in the administration vary on how to deal with Damascus. The White House cannot overlook Syria's sensible call to resume negotiations without any preconditions. It cannot just go on adopting Israel's view on that matter. Washington's call for Syria to stop supporting Hizbullah and Palestinian opposition groups does not make sense. Damascus was instrumental in paving the ground for Palestinian elections to fill the void left by Arafat, a role it couldn't have played had it not been close to Palestinian groups and been able to influence them in a positive manner. So far, the only response to the Syrian offer has come from the Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, yet it was nothing but a mindless repetition of tired rhetoric. All that Israel wants is to wriggle out of the peace process with Damascus, thus keeping Syria locked in both international and regional limbo. At least this is what Sharon maintains. The Syrian president's call for the resumption of negotiations without preconditions means, in the Syrian lexicon, that talks should pick up where they left off and proceed according to the rules of the peace process. This call is the most politically pragmatic move possible given the circumstances. It is hard for anyone to ignore the Syrian gesture, particularly since this gesture reinforces the positive attitude Damascus exhibited with regards to both Iraqi and Palestinian affairs. Besides, Syria is unlikely to implement Security Council Resolution 1559 without a quid pro quo. Syria is probably formulating a response to Resolution 1559 through arrangements to be announced in due time. But this response has to be part of a bigger arrangement, an arrangement involving the peace process on both the Syrian and Lebanese tracks. Otherwise a withdrawal from Lebanon would trigger chaos and significantly complicate the Palestinian issue. Also, Damascus is not going to dismantle Hizbullah. The US or Israel will have to do that, which will be costly, if not impossible. Israel has tried to dismantle Hizbullah in the past, and failed. To sum up, Syria cannot implement Resolution 1559 independently of a comprehensive solution or the resumption of talks. It would be unrealistic to expect Damascus to do so. The Syrian offer was designed to alleviate the pressure Washington was putting on them regarding Iraq. Syrian efforts on the Iraqi borders have not defused the tension in Syrian-US relations. Therefore, the return to the negotiation table is the realistic and potentially most fruitful option. Syria is opting for the resumption of talks on strategic, not tactical, grounds. It is easier to achieve progress on the Syrian track of the peace talks than on any other track. Negotiations with no preconditions do not mean going back to square one. This is not pragmatic anywhere and definitely not in the Syrian case. Damascus wants Israel to start acting as a country that wants to be treated as a neighbour. If Israel is to earn recognition it could start by showing respect for the progress made in talks with previous governments. Syria was not playing on words when it said it was ready to resume talks without preconditions. It does not have to spell out its position any further. Damascus seeks peace and wants to resume talks. It does not want to get into a verbal exchange that gives Sharon and his associates a chance to wriggle out of their responsibilities. Sharon's government does not seem favourably disposed to talks with Damascus, but the pressure of Israel's military institution -- which is much more politically realistic than the government -- may change things. There is also always the chance that elections could be held in Israel and that a more moderate government would come to office.
