The Waiting Game

Much speculation has been going on about the target of the Israeli strike that took place in early September against a Syrian facility. However, through all the speculation, the official sources from Israel, Syria and the US have been remarkably quiet. Why?

Here are the facts that we know with certainty.

1. Israel, with official admission, made a bombing raid in Syria.
2. Syria knows with certainty what was in the bombed site.
3. Israel relied on some sort of intelligence in assessing the importance of the site.
4. In response to speculation, Syria has indicated that the site is not nuclear and was not of any military significance.

Everything else is speculation, conjectures, unverifiable leaks and journalistic embellishments as far as we can possibly know. The process of justifying the speculation led to the question of why Syria would not simply offer irrefutable proof of its innocence. However, Syria has no reason to offer proof of its innocence at this stage since all the benefit that would accrue to such proof would fall in the court of public opinion and has no tangible benefits to the Syrians. There are only two possibilities from the Syrian perspective,

1. This was a nuclear site: It is clear in this case why the Syrians would be quiet and unwilling to invite anyone to inspect the site. Less clear is the Israeli silence. By offering incontrovertible proof of Syria's guilt, Israel can gain in both the public opinion and international political support for its policies in the region. Hence, it would stand to reason that the evidence the Israelis gathered was, to put it mildly, less than perfect. Either way, Syria would be better off keeping the lid on the whole thing. If the Israelis never offer their proof in public, then nothing can be proven against Syria. If Israel does offer the proof, then Syria, by keeping quiet now, can better counter Israeli claims.

2. This was not a nuclear site: In this case Syria can score some PR points by inviting independent observers to inspect the site and put an end to the speculation (of course, at the juncture, speculation can be restarted by postulating that the site shown to the observers was not the actual site of the bombing,...) However, Syria can gain considerable political points by waiting for Israel to make the first announcement regarding the nature of the site. A first announcement by the Israelis would amount to a commitment that cannot be withdrawn as to the nature of the strike. Should Israel make the commitment that it was a nuclear site, then the Syrians would have a field day showing the world that it was not. That the Israelis, aided by the Americans, are wrong again in their intelligence gathering and should be ignored when they identify a risk. Creating this impression of faulty intelligence increases the burden of proof on Israel and the US in case of future claims of suspected infractions (i.e. rearming HA...) On the other hand, an Israeli admission that the site was non-nuclear is an admission of a flagrant violation of international law and Israeli image as an aggressive state who attacks its neighbors without provocation would be further enhanced. Again, Syria would benefit more by waiting than by trying to offer proof of innocence before an Israeli commitment to the nature of the strike is made.

According to this analysis, Syria has no incentive to make the first move because they have imperfect information regarding the reasons Israel attacked, and better information would facilitate a better response and a higher payoff. Israel, on the other hand, has no incentive to make the first move because of the nature of intelligence gathering. It is imperfect and they cannot willingly assist the Syrians in preparing their response to the intelligence Israel has by publicizing that intelligence.

The Truth about Syria

Between Liz Cheney and Barry Rubin, anyone who is trying to find the truth about Syria will come out with the erroneous impression that Syria is a dark and evil country that is backwards and not safe to visit. This is mainly because these are the two main sources for search results regarding the truth about Syria.

I would like to urge the Syrian bloggers out there to start a PR campaing and publish a post titled "The Truth about Syria" to counter the presentations made by these so called authors. I want to start by pointing a good sample of all that is True about Syria

Bits and Pieces

To My Syrian Countrymen:

I never discussed the Golan Heights with another Syrian. To us it was always the Jolan. We Syrians do not G our J's.

From the Syrian perspective, Israel Occupied the Jolan. From the Israeli perspective, Israel Conquered the Jolan. I find it irritating when Syrians use Conquest to describe the occupation of the Jolan. So if you are a Syrian, please use occupied. It may seem pedantic to insist on semantics, but semantics do matter. I learned that from my good friend and dissertation advisor, an Israeli. He bragged about the Israeli conquests of 67 and I emphasized the injustice associated with an occupation.

To My Israeli Neighbors

When contemplating an offer for peace, you should always evaluate it in terms of symmetry. That is, would the offer be reasonable to you if the situation was reversed. When you do that you will realize why we would not accept half the Jolan back for peace and why we insist on getting back the whole thing. Beware of a Syrian who will take less than the full Jolan for peace, he or she cannot be trusted.

We see history through our lens and you see it through yours, the truth is most likely somewhere in between. To debate history is an exercise in futility, the important thing to consider is where we stand now and where we would like to be in 20 years

To My Lebanese Brothers

Some of you need to stop seeing Syria in every inkblot you look at. Sure, Syria is going to look after its interests in Lebanon and elsewhere but it is not the cause of all Lebanon's ills. So far you have the Shia, the Aounists, the Nationalists (SSNP), and the radical Sunnis as Syrian stooges. You make it sound like more than half of the Lebanese are Syrian agents. We may not like our government but we love our country and when you guys keep on blaming Syria for everything bad in Lebanon, we get nervous and we assume a defensive position. You know the old saying, "me and my brother against my cousin and me and my cousin against the stranger!"

To the Ba'athists

Arab Nationalism will not make our ethnic minorities feel more at home. Syrian nationalism can. One can be a Syrian Kurd but can never be an Arab Kurd, so stop pushing Arab nationalism at the expense of genuine Syrian citizens.

To the Syrian Opposition

Don't be surprised when Bashar wins a 97% approval rating (referendum). You boycotted the elections so the only people who made their votes heard are the president's supporters. It's your fault he won by such a wide margin. Seven years from now, tell your people to make a stand and vote "NO". And for those of you who say the people voted because they are afraid, I say bullshit. The people voted because they do not want to be the ones who did not vote. One person can curry favor with the regime, and gain an advantage over others, when they vote. People are not stupid, they act in self interest and they all try to curry favor by voting. Of course with so many people voting no one can claim to have helped the president win and all citizens lose. This can explain the numerous celebrations in the name of the president that were taking place in Syria. Your vote did not help your cause so maybe your money will, and not a single capitalist can be seen as not celebrating.

To Josh Landis

Your account of the first impression upon arrival in Damascus made me consider quitting the private sector and joining Academia so I can have the summer off for travels. BTW, I never thanked you for giving me my first link. I just want you to know that I did and still appreciate it.

To Alex

Thanks for asking me to contribute to the Creative Syria Forum. It's an outstanding project from an outstanding person. I just hope my piece was not a waste of valuable space.

To Ehsani2

What do you make of the construction boom and now the apparent increase in interest in the banking sector of the Syrian Market? I would say that the combination is, at a minimum, a move in the right direction despite some other problems.

To My Brother

I don't know if you're still coming to read my posts; but if you are, give me a call.

Lessons from Damascus

The sirens of war sounded and our basement apartment filled with frantic neighbors from the apartments above. The war has officially started and these sirens erased from my mind all the meaningless comparatively mundane, memories that I have acquired in the previous nine years of my existence. The sirens kept on sounding for twenty days and each time they had the same effect. The children ran home from the streets where we would play and the neighbors came down to out tiny apartments until the all clear sirens sounded and then everyone went home and we went back to the streets to finish a game that was started a few sirens earlier. These twenty days of the October war constitute what now seems to be the clearest memory of my childhood in Damascus. It was during those days that I finally met the two spinsters who lived with their brother in the top floor apartment. I learned that the brother never married so that he may not leave his sisters alone. It was during those same twenty days that I met and knew the names of all our neighbors and heard the stories of the paths their lives has taken; but in between the stories, there was always the discussion about how we were about to regain the Jolan. In my few years that was the first time I heard about the Jolan and, despite the fact that none of the neighbors was a Jolani, they all seemed to have a great deal of pride in the prospect of that mysterious piece of land returning to Syrian possession. It was not to be.

In those twenty days, Syria was a single person where everyone aided in the national effort and everyone seemed to care a great deal about all others. The gossip ceased completely and the usual observation about someone's dress or how bad their cooking was simply did not materialize. I remember the two sisters, after six days of climbing up and down the five flights of stairs leading from their apartment to ours, decided that they would simply stay in our apartment and neither of my parents. Now we had ten people in the small apartment instead of the usual eight. A couple of days later, more of the neighbors decided to simply stay. The added people did not seem to matter. It is as if our little apartment, which normally felt crowded with just the eight of us, has now grown in size to comfortably accommodate the dozen or so people who were staying there.

One thing that was clear from those twenty days was that the Jolan was embedded into the consciousness of all the Syrians that I knew at the time. When they talked about the loss of the land, they talked as if they each lost a part of themselves and when the prospect of its return seemed bright, they all seemed to rejoice. The October war provided many Syrians, at the time, with the hope that we can, one day, reclaim the land that was lost six years earlier; that we can be whole again.

The following year, some gentlemen visited our house in the middle of the night and politely asked my father to accompany them on a trip that would last thirty months. At least that's what mother told us the next day when we woke up. Over the next few years we learned the lessons that every Syrian school child learned in those times; do not say anything negative about the government lest someone hears you. Syrians no longer trusted each other and society became fragmented by fear.

By the time I made it to the United States many years later, I had become a reticent young man who trusted no one; especially other Syrians. I kept to myself and spent my time busy with the meaningless stuff of growing up. I went to school and got degrees and evolved as a person. All the while, slowly forgetting my Syrian heritage and spending no time worrying about the Jolan. I had decided that it was out of my hands. I could not do anything about it and therefore should not expend any energy thinking about it and for twenty years I was successful. I knew nothing about Syria with the exception of the biggest news. I knew there was a peace process that went nowhere and I knew that Hafez had died and was succeeded by his son. One day, after my parents had retired and went back to Syria, I decided to look up some news on Syria just to feel better about my parents being there. I found out that many changes have taken place and, in later conversations with relatives, I came to find out that I need not worry and that the old order was no longer in place. The new President was a modern and liberal individual who was liberalizing the country. My interest in Syria intensified and the question of the Jolan became central to my thinking again. I found out that I appreciated Hafez's position that the Jolan must be returned in its entirety for there to be peace with Israel. I found myself evaluating the possibilities of what I might be willing to "give up" for peace and I came up with nothing. In order for any peace to be acceptable I must get back the entire Jolan with full sovereignty.

When Camille posed the question of what I would write to convince an Israeli that they should give back the Jolan, I had to think about it for sometime before deciding that I would not write such a letter. I should not have to explain to anyone why they should return what is my possession. To address the fears of an Israeli is to legitimize those fears and when the Israeli government says that Syrians cannot be trusted and I respond by attempting to convince anyone that I can is an admission that we cannot be trusted. The Syrian position is clear, full return of the Jolan for full peace with symmetric security arrangements that lets both sides sleep at ease. Any Israeli who cannot accept this tradeoff is someone who cannot accept any tradeoff. The Jolan was not returned to Syria under Hafez because of lack of political will and not a lack of trust.

The above was submitted to the Creative Forum on the topic of the Golan Heights.

Syria: Peaceful Activist Gets 12 Years With Hard Labor

By: Human Rights Watch Published: May 11, 2007 at 08:14

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad should immediately exonerate prominent human rights activist Dr. Kamal al-Labwani, who was sentenced today to 12 years in prison including hard labor on politically motivated charges, Human Rights Watch said.

A Damascus criminal court convicted Labwani of "communicating with a foreign country and inciting it to initiate aggression against Syria." Labwani had visited the United States and Europe in the fall of 2005 where he had met with government officials, journalists and human rights organizations.

Labwani's sentence was handed down two weeks after another prominent Syrian human rights activists, Anwar al-Bunni, was sentenced to five years in prison on politically motivated charges.

"The Syrian government has accelerated its crackdown on free speech and peaceful activism," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "Peaceful activists like Labwani are paying a heavy price for expressing their views."

Syrian security forces arrested Labwani, a physician and founder of the Democratic Liberal Gathering, on November 8, 2005 upon his return from a two-month trip to Europe and the United States. During his trip, he appeared on the pan-Arab Al-Mustaqilla and Al-Hurra television networks where he called on the Syrian government to respect fundamental freedoms and human rights.

The Democratic Liberal Gathering is a group of Syrian intellectuals and activists who advocate for peaceful change in Syria based on democratic reforms, liberalism, secularism and respect for human rights.

From the onset, Labwani's trial was marred by the interference of the state security agencies. The prosecution added the charge of "communicating with a foreign country and inciting it to initiate aggression against Syria" after the head of National Security sent a letter on November 17, 2005 to the Minister of Justice asking him to add this accusation to the lesser charges that the General Prosecutor's office had initially filed against Labwani. In his defense pleadings, Labwani's attorney referred to the letter and argued that the new charge would not have been included if National Security had not intervened because the investigation had not revealed any evidence that Labwani had called on any country to initiate aggression against Syria.

On April 28, following al-Bunni's conviction, Labwani and other imprisoned political and human rights activists smuggled out a joint letter which said that detainees in Syria "should feel that they are not alone... and that there is hope for a peaceful resolution of the crisis of freedoms and human rights in Syria."

"Syrian officials repeatedly claim that their country wants to play a constructive role in the region," Whitson said. "But this is hard to believe as they continue to imprison peaceful dissidents at home."

Fiscal Deficit Represents Major Challenge for Syrian Economy

This article written by Jihad Yazigi and published in The Media Line on Monday, May 07, 2007 brings to light a growing problem that threatens the growth potential of the Syrian economy. Namely, the expanding public debt (deficit spending by the government.) There has been and continues to be incremental structural changes to the laws and rules governing the Syrian economy. Banking laws are liberalized, private insurance is permitted and private investment has been encouraged. None of these reforms address the fundamental problem the economy faces; the government intervention in the market place. Persistant subsidies on deisel fuel and other basic necessities continue to hamper the progress of the economy. When Syria received the 1.4 million Iraqi's, there was a surge in demand that translated into sharp increases in the prices of real estates and is followed by increased activity in the real estate market. However, these refugees also cause a spike in the demand for basic necessities that are heavily subsidized. The increases in demand would place an undue burden on the treasury since the government insists on providing the subsidy to everyone. When the population increases by more than 5% over the span of a couple of years and the foreign demand for your products increases as well (Iraqi demand for Syrian goods is on the rise), one would expect a functioning economy to boom and the per-capita increases in real GDP should be well above targets. This does not seem to happen in Syria. The government insists on maintaining the system of subsidies in some areas which encourage overproduction and price controls in other areas which encourages overconsumption but discourages increasing production to meet the actual increases in demand; effectively preventing the employment of more Syrians in labor intensive sectors of the economy such as agriculture and light industry (food processing).

It is the policies that affect the incentives facing the individuals that are the hardest to give up because of the amount of public resistance. It is simultaneously these same policies that prevent the economy from advancing beyound a welfare state where unemployment is rampant and growth is minimal. It is time to abandon these policies and remove the subsidies and controls. Rising prices will put pressure on production to increase and employment to increase with wages to follow. By remaining committed to centralized planning and public ownership of resources we are hanging ourselves with our own devices.

Developments in the Syrian Economy

Newsweek published this article regarding the development of economic issues in the ME in general and using the developments in Syria in particular. The article lends an encouraging view to the degree and effects of the reform process in Syria. The best news to come from the article is that there is a genuine interest among Syrian bureaucrats to learn and apply their newfound knowledge to the Syrian economy. This is particularly good because the article indicates that the new policies are fully supported by the President.