Following 17 years of on-again, off-again Syrian-Israeli negotiations, little has been achieved, and some say change is unlikely, Bassel Oudat reports from Damascus Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, addressing the Organisation of the Islamic Conference a few days ago, has said that peace talks with Israel, which started with the Madrid Conference in 1993, have done more harm than good to the cause of peace. "Israel has exposed its true face to the world," the president said, adding that peace is "as distant as ever". The real situation may not be that desperate. The leaders of both countries still regard peace as a priority, but their opinions on how to go about it have changed. Over the past few years, the Syrians maintained that they could make peace if Israel pledges to withdraw from all of Syria's occupied territories. The Israelis, until recently at least, didn't contest this point. Indeed, Israeli governments starting with Rabin's in 1993 and including Barak's in 2000 said they would withdraw from the Golan. Only a year ago, former US president Jimmy Carter said that Syria and Israel agree on 85 per cent of the issues in contest and that a lasting settlement was within reach. Now, hopes for immediate progress seem to be waning. Back in 2000, negotiators had to tangle with three sticking points. One was Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights. Talks went generally well, except for differences that persisted over 44 square kilometres of land situated near Lake Tabaria, or Tiberias. There, due to the shifting of the water level, the shores have moved away from Syrian borders, giving rise to a dispute over what land belongs to whom. Then there was the issue of disarmament. Syria didn't want to disarm any of its territory unless Israel disarmed an area equal in size on its side. The Syrians and Israelis also disagreed on what security and surveillance measures to apply on the borders, and of who will take charge of their monitoring. The third point was the western slopes of Gabal Al-Sheikh, or Mount Hermon. Israel had created major tourist facilities there and wanted to keep running them, and the Syrians wouldn't allow that. Negotiations between the countries were resumed in 2008. So far, four rounds of talks have been held in Istanbul and Ankara. By the end of the fourth round, the Syrians said they were ready for direct talks if the Americans joined in as guarantors. Damascus turned down an offer by some EU countries to step into the talks, insisting that only the Americans are powerful enough to make a deal stick. When Israel waged its war on Gaza early this year, talks were discontinued. The Syrian government says that only US sponsorship of the talks could make the negotiations credible. Damascus has said this to the Americans several times but has gotten no answer as yet. With a new administration in place, the Syrians have no way of knowing which way the wind will blow, and so far the Obama administration has not spelt out its regional policy in full detail. The Syrians, meanwhile, have been introducing new ideas with regards to Middle East peace. They say Turkey should continue to mediate, even after the Americans join. More importantly, Damascus wants Hizbullah and Hamas to take part in preliminary negotiations. A few weeks ago, President Al-Assad suggested Hizbullah be included in the Syrian-Israeli talks, if and when they resume in Ankara. He said that he could persuade both Hamas and Hizbullah to come to the talks. Speaking to reporters, he affirmed that, "major parties should take part in the peace process." The Syrians want a peace that leads to Israel's withdrawal from all Arab occupied territories and not Syria's alone. Damascus has made it clear that the peace it seeks should be in keeping with the Arab peace initiative. Israel, for its part, wants Syria to stop supporting and arming Hizbullah in Lebanon and to expel the leaders of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad from Damascus. Israel also wants Syria to lower its level of strategic cooperation with Iran. Damascus has not accepted any of these terms. With a far right government installed in Israel, the question of full withdrawal from the Golan has come up for discussion once more. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, speaking following talks in Washington, said that his country was willing to negotiate with Syria "without preconditions". But the Syrians are still worried that Israel is reneging on pulling out of the Golan. "We have it on record that successive Israeli governments have, since 1993, promised full withdrawal from the Golan, all the way to the borders of 4 June 1967," Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Muallim said recently. The minister wanted the Americans to remind the Israelis of their commitments. "Without the US pressuring Israel to make peace, what's the point of negotiating?" Al-Muallim asked. Days before the Organisation of the Islamic Conference met, President Al-Assad made a subtle threat to the Israelis. The lack of progress in Turkish-sponsored talks, he said, justifies resistance. "The failure of political effort is what entitles the resistance to carry on with its duties." Obviously, he wasn't talking about a possible war between Syria and Israel. The Syrian president said that, "everyone now knows that the course of war [waged] to achieve political objectives has brought nothing but pain to all who choose this option." Blaming the Israelis for the failure of the peace negotiations, Al-Assad was telling the Israelis that unless some progress is made towards peace, he would unleash resistance groups against them. Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon wasn't happy with Al-Assad's tough talking. According to Ayalon, Al-Assad doesn't want a peace deal with Israel, but is staging a charade to improve his relations with the West. The Syrians only want negotiations as a way of ending their international isolation, the Israeli official said. As the two sides failed to reach a compromise, the situation became more complicated. At present, it seems that each side is bringing new positions to the negotiating table. President Al-Assad said, "when a partner in available, we'll talk about a time to start the peace talks." Tough talking aside, it is obvious that a new scene is emerging. With a far right government in Israel, and with Obama exploring new ways to deal with the Middle East, the future looks not exactly grim, but ambiguous.
