The Arab League has the support of the Western states on the Security Council for its peace plan on Syria. But does it have Russia, asks Graham Usher at the UN On 31 January the Arab League Secretary-General Nabil El-Arabi and Qatari Premier Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al-Thani brought the Syrian crisis before the Security Council. Via a new resolution, they called on it not just to condemn the spiralling violence but to endorse a peace plan that would have President Bashar Al-Assad step aside in deference to a new National Unity government and elections for a post-Baathist future. Their plea was warmly received by Western states, including ministers from France, Britain, Portugal, Germany and the United States. All believe Al-Assad's tenure in power should end, and all attended the council to lend the Arab League muscle. "We all know change is coming to Syria," said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, addressing the council. "Despite its ruthless tactics, Al-Assad's reign of terror will end. The question for us is how many more innocent civilians will die before this country is able to move forward." The League's plea was coolly heard by Russia, Syria's strongest ally on the council. And it was denounced by Syria's UN Ambassador Bashar Jaafari, who accused Al-Arabi and especially Qatar of acting at the behest of foreign powers hostile to Damascus. Syria "will stand firm in confronting its enemies", he vowed. The League's intervention marks the most concerted attempt to break an impasse that has rendered the council mute before the most dangerous conflict yet spawned by the Arab democratic revolutions -- one that not only threatens civil strife within Syria but the seeds of religious, ethnic and regional conflict beyond it. The stakes were reflected by the presence of heavyweights like Clinton. Together with the Arabs, she and they hope to wilt Russian resistance, which has already cast one veto in defence of Syria at the Security Council and remains loath to betray a protégé that has enabled Russian influence throughout the Middle East. Will this massive regional and international pressure be enough? Al-Thani pulled no punches. Despite pledges made -- and the presence of the 160-member Arab League mission in Syria -- he charged that Damascus had failed to end an oppression that has left 5400 dead, most of them civilians, according to UN estimates. On the contrary, "the killing machine is still at work," he said. El-Arabi was softer. He insisted the League's call for President Al-Assad to delegate his "full authority" to a deputy did not require him to "renounce his power" but was rather a "reform" that Al-Assad had allegedly advocated in the past (it will be interesting to see if the Syrian leader advocates it in the future). He also insisted the league's plan was not about regime change. "We are attempting to avoid any future intervention, particularly military intervention," said El-Arabi. Taking Syria to the Security Council was "to support our initiative, not to take its place". Russia has two problems with the Security Council draft resolution as it stands. While the text has no call to sanctions, it doesn't prelude their introduction in the future. If Syria refuses to comply with its demands -- including the delegation of powers by Al-Assad to a deputy -- "further measures" will be considered, including sanctions. For Moscow sanctions could be a first step to outside intervention, as they were in Libya and Iraq. The second is the notion of Al-Assad being compelled to transfer power. Speaking to reporters at the Council, Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin drew a line between what the Arab League can wish and what the Security Council can do. "The Arab league has the right to express their view but we don't think the Security Council has the right to impose those things [on the Syrian government]. They should be put on the tableê We want to act in a way which will allow the Arab League to continue its important function and help the government and Syrian opposition groups to come together. That's why we have invited (all three) to come to Moscow." Still, said Churkin, "We hope the council will come to a consensus on the Syrian issue." That may be easier said than done. Western states on the Council believe negotiations on the resolution can be wrapped up swiftly, since all that is really required by member states is to vote in favour (or not) of the Arab peace plan. But Russia wants a briefing to the Council by Mohamed Ahmed Mustafa Al-Dabi, head of the now "suspended" Arab League observer mission. It believes the mission's report was more "objective" about conditions in Syria than Al-Thani's presentation of it before the Council. The report "clearly confirmed that in a number of neighbourhoods (in Syria) armed forces attacked the army. This showed that all sides must make an obligation to end violence," said Churkin. These are minor rifts. They could be negotiated. The deeper one is the split that remains on the Council between those Arab and Western states which believe there can be no solution to the Syrian crisis with Al-Assad and the regime he personifies in place; and those states, like Russia, which still believe there can no solution without him or at least his consent. That may need a longer bridge to cross.
