The Syrian government continues to assert its authority in Lebanon and the region as a whole, despite US attempts to contain the Syrian influence, reports Dina Dakhlallah from Damascus Syria once again finds itself the focus of world attention, at the heart of the Middle East crisis. Washington and its European allies have turned the heat on Syria over its extensive regional role. Syria has 15,000 to 20,000 troops deployed in Lebanon. Washington is pressing Damascus to restructure its policies simply because the United States wants to create a "Greater Middle East" that suits its own policies in this part of the world. Pentagon officials have accused unspecified members of the Syrian Baath Party of supporting so-called terror in Iraq. Syrian officials dismissed the charges as part of the psychological war against Syria. Ali Aqlah Irsan, president of the Arab Writers Union, says that Syrian public opinion cannot comprehend the US position, noting that the US is involved in occupation, destruction and murder. The US is turning a blind eye to Zionist terrorist practices. Washington actually views Israeli practices as legitimate acts of self-defence, Irsan says. As for the Syrian presence in Lebanon, it is a Syrian- Lebanese affair, Irsan asserts. The Syrian presence in Lebanon has helped end the fighting, brought stability to Lebanon, and was useful in re-building the institutions of that country. Last week, Syria began redeploying its troops in Lebanon. The number of Syrian troops in Lebanon has decreased from 35,000 to 15,000. Although the Syrian redeployment decision was made following the UN Security Council resolution on the deployment of foreign troops in Lebanon, Irsan and others refuse to see the Syrian redeployment as a sign of capitulation. The redeployment, they claim, was a result of bilateral agreements between the two countries. As for the Congress's decision on human rights violations in Syria, Haytham Al-Malih, a lawyer and a member of the Syrian Human Rights Society, says that such a decision is hardly surprising if one is to recall that the majority of Congressmen are pro-Israel. According to Al- Malih, it is not surprising for the US to open the dossier of human rights and look into the cases of some members of the Syrian opposition who are known to oppose the Syrian state and its policies in a fundamental manner. Legally speaking, Al-Malih says, there is nothing in international law that allows one country to pass laws to punish another country, irrespective of the circumstances. According to international law, any country has the right to have or not have diplomatic and economic ties with another country. The US decisions and the sanctions Washington is imposing against Syria are illegal measures and can be considered a type of state terrorism, Al-Malih adds. Al-Malih is opposed to Syria's presence in Lebanon. Yet he states that this is a Lebanese affair, not a US or French one. UN Resolution 1559 is wrong and illegal, because the UN Security Council is not entitled to pass such a resolution so long as Lebanon has not filed a complaint to the council in this respect. Had Lebanon submitted a complaint, the situation would have been different. America, says Al-Malih, wants to isolate Syria and the entire affair is designed to promote Israeli interests. According to Al-Malih, the real challenge is for existing regimes and governments to open up domestically, so that the entire nation may be able to confront the US. We cannot stand up to the US so long as the governments are not one with the people, he adds. The issue of human rights must be adopted by the authority. In Al-Malih's opinion, the authority that respects the citizen and the human being is reinvigorating itself. And the authority that does not respect the human being is emasculating itself. The power and the weakness of the authority depend on the people. We do not support the schemes of the US in the region, because everything the US does violates international legitimacy and constitutes state terrorism. And yet we, on the home front, should take positive steps. Even the Syrian presence in Lebanon should be reconsidered. And the authority should make real effort to resolve domestic issues, for once these issues are resolved, the nation will be able to confront external pressures, Al-Malih concludes. Munir Al-Himish, director-general of the Arab Strategic Studies Centre, sees US pressures on Syria as an extension of the 1950s policies, of the Eisenhower-inspired fill- the-vacuum theories. Following 9/11, US policies have assumed new objectives under the guise of fighting terror. The neo-cons are using 9/11 to justify pre-emptive war. According to this strategy, the entire world has to decide whether it is with the war against terror and by implication with the US, or against that war and by implication against the US. And this whole new strategy is now unfolding the Middle East. According to the neo-cons, the US has the right to terminate any situation it sees as endangering it in any country, even through military force. What is alarming is that this strategy has actually been put into action, as was the case in Iraq. The argument was that Iraq was a mere chink in the armour, an obstacle on a strategic path. The pressures against Syria should be seen in the same light, Al- Himish says. The US scheme for this region will stumble so long that Syria resists it. This is why the US is putting pressure on Syria through several decisions, starting with the Syria Accountability Act and ending with UN Security Council Resolution 1559 and the Congress decision on human rights in Syria. Other measures may follow, Al-Himish says. Writer and media expert Hussein Al-Udat links the US pressures with the conflict between Syrian and US policies. The US, he says, wants to reshape the region. The US wants to implement new policies and build new political systems. The US wants to restrict Syria within its own borders. It wants to deprive Damascus from the regional role it plays with regards to the Lebanese resistance, the Palestinian resistance and Iraq. It seems that the US wants Syria to help it in Iraq. Damascus is influential, for it has the support of progressive and pan-Arab forces in Iraq. Syria commands tribal allegiances outside its borders. And Damascus has leverage on pro-Syrian Baathists abroad. The US covets these assets and wants Damascus to use them to promote US interests. Washington wants Syria to help it in Iraq. Then it wants to abolish Damascus's role outside Syria's borders altogether, Al-Udat says. Syria, meanwhile, cannot turn tail and hide behind its own borders, for more than one reason. The Syrian public opinion is totally opposed to US policies. Also US policies run counter to everything Syria has said or done over the past 50 years. Damascus is aware of the US game and is trying to cool things down without sacrificing the main premises of its regional policy. But the Syrian government is forgetting one thing, Syrian intellectuals say: the home front. The government, they suggest, should create a true national unity, should launch a political system that is truly responsive to public needs. Syria, the intellectuals believe, can use more political, economic, social, and cultural reforms, for such reforms would strengthen the country in the face of US pressure. Instead, the government has so far ignored the domestic front and continued to rely on its regional cards -- such as the Lebanese resistance, and such as the hope that the Americans will get into further trouble in Iraq.
