Washington- Creating a sense of unease in Syria's relationship with Iran as well as exploring areas of “common interest” particularly in counterterrorism and securing Iraq appear to be the short term objectives of the latest push by the Obama administration in engaging Damascus, as the Syrian leadership eyeing broader economic benefits and improving its regional stature. The U.S. engagement efforts towards Syria came in their loudest forms last week after nominating Robert Ford as the first U.S. ambassador to Damascus in five years, and dispatching Undersecretary of State William Burns on an official visit, where he met Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem. A senior U.S. official tells Al-Hayat that the visit falls within “President's (Barack Obama) belief that it is in our interest to engage directly with the Syrian government” adding that the goal is to “look for areas of common interest” while being “upfront and clear about the areas of concern”. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, noted that the delegation to Damascus included the State Department coordinator for counterterrorism Daniel Benjamin who remained there an extra day “to do some additional dialogue with Syrian officials on counterterrorism matters”. He classifies counterterrorism as one area where the U.S. hopes to develop some “common understandings” despite “some bigger differences” such as Syria's relations with Hizballah and Hamas, weapons transfer across the Lebanese border, and lack of tough restrictions to avoid foreign fighters from crossing into Iraq. Nonetheless, the official mentions cooperating on fighting Al-Qaeda as one possible venue where Washington and Damascus “may find more in common” and perhaps “build some confidence in the relationship.” While the official asserts that there is “no formal counterterrorism effort underway” he points out that the “discussions have begun (during the visit) with Damascus” on that issue. The cooperation between the two countries on counterterrorism has declined to an all time low in May of 2005 due to policy differences on the War in Iraq, and the increasing tension between the two countries. However, the intelligence community in Washington has been pushing to resume such coordination given Syria's role in capturing al-qaeda suspects in post 9-11 period, and providing information in 2002 that helped foil a planned attack on the U.S. Navy's Administrative Support Unit in Bahrain (Reported by Newsweek). Andrew Tabler of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy asserts that since many foreign fighter networks are present in Syria, it could be one area where “there can be an immediate discussion” on the topic. The engagement can also help in creating an atmosphere of unease between Iran and Syria according to Tabler. While Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a senate committee yesterday that Washington would like to see Syria “generally to begin to move away from the relationship with Iran”, Tabler points out that “hardly anybody in the administration thinks that Syria is going to break its alliance with Tehran.” Rather, the language used by Washington and Clinton herself, aims according to the expert at creating tension between the two. Tabler reads the visit of the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Syria today as a sign of “insecurity” on the Iranian part about an alliance that might be threatened by European and American openness to Syria. Damascus' primary goal from its engagement, besides gaining some regional stature, remains working with the U.S. to lift the sanctions imposed in 2003 through the Syria Accountability Act. The U.S. senior official alludes to the “very honest and candid dialogue (between Washington and Damascus) about what are the proximate causes of the sanctions being and some of the steps necessary to look at reviewing”. He names arms smuggling to Hizballah as one cause of the sanctions, and stresses that a demarcation of Syrian-Lebanese border as indicated in UNSCR 1701, “could be an important step in safeguarding Lebanese sovereignty and making it easier to stop the transfer of weapons”.
