Kerry’s gaffe likely to alter Syrian game plan

Whether US Secretary of State John Kerry blurted a surprise offer to Syria inadvertently or it was a calculated move on his part we may never know. But the Russians were quick to jump in with an initiative based on Kerry’s proposal to disarm Syria’s arsenal of chemical weapons and put them under UN control.
It all happened so quickly on Monday and by the end of the day Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid Al Mu’alem endorsed Russia’s initiative, taking the wind out of US efforts to mobilize Congress and close allies to support a military strike against Damascus.
President Obama described the initiative as a breakthrough and hinted that he had discussed Syria’s chemical weapons with Russian President Vladimir Putin a week ago. Positive reactions came from as far away as China to Germany, Britain and Iran. France said it would propose a resolution to the UN Security Council on the issue.
Congress postponed voting on a resolution authorizing the use of force. Suddenly a diplomatic breakthrough was possible.
In any case, Syria will prove to be President Obama’s most challenging policy test of his second term. He has chosen to go to Congress to secure an authorization for what US officials insist will be a limited punitive strike against Syria for its alleged use of chemical gas on Aug. 21 in a Damascus suburb. But the strike has proven to be a divisive issue for the Americans — the majority is against it — as well as to the rest of the world. Even before the Russian initiative was made public it was not clear if Obama was going to receive a strong endorsement from Congress.
It was to be an uphill struggle for President Obama. Even if he gets the authorization there remains the challenge of attacking a sovereign country without UN approval. Even America’s closest allies in Europe opted to wait for the UN chemical inspectors’ report on the Ghouta incident. And until the US produces a smoking gun that ties the regime directly to the attacks there will always be doubts over the legality of the proposed American strike.
President Assad has denied use of chemical weapons against his people. He has dared the US to produce evidence to the contrary. It now appears that neither the French nor the Americans are in possession of incontrovertible evidence.
The Obama administration knows that it must do something to punish Syria or risk losing credibility. Maybe this is why Kerry made his surprise offer. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov responded by saying that Moscow will push Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control.
It was the first sign that a political deal could be struck to avoid US military plans against Syria. Such a deal could placate most sides. It could also pave the way for the convening of a conference on the Syrian conflict.
Until Kerry’s bombshell offer, the US maintained that it does want regime change in Syria. A peaceful deal may not be to the liking of its Gulf allies plus Turkey who would have liked to see a US strike aimed at decapitating the regime.
A deal would also discombobulate the Syrian opposition, which so far has rejected the possibility of negotiating with the regime.
While US political efforts were focused on building a case for an attack on Syria, few were discussing possible day-after scenarios.
Syria says an attack against it will bolster the presence of Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists on its territory. If the strike cripples the regime’s military capabilities, such as its airpower, it may change the balance of power on the ground in favor of the rebels. It is a fact that extremist elements are now in control of many parts of the country and that some groups are challenging the secular Free Syria Army (FSA). The weakening of the regime will accelerate the splintering of the country into sectarian pockets and enclaves and will prolong the suffering of the Syrian people.
The presence of extremists in Syria will constitute a challenge to the stability and security of neighboring countries, including Israel. Chaos in Syria will not be contained and the danger of overspill is real.
A strike will also compound the refugee problem. With over four million Syrian refugees in neighboring countries today, military intervention will initiate a fresh wave of people seeking refugee outside Syria.
There is also the possibility that a short punitive strike will not be enough and that the US and its allies could find themselves sucked into a new regional war. The specter of an enlarged conflict is remote but not impossible.
The conflict has taken regional dimensions and the country has become a battlefield for proxy wars. For Israel the strike against Syria would constitute a warning to Iran over its nuclear program. For Gulf countries Assad’s defeat would stem the tide of the so-called Shia crescent. There are other agendas for Turkey and Russia as well.
The Syrian conflict has polarized the region. More than 100,000 Syrians had perished in the past two and a half years and a political solution has evaded the international community. The need to chart a path out of this conflict through a political deal has never been more urgent and necessary.

• Osama Al Sharif is a journalist and political commentator based in Amman.
Email: [email protected]