http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10405

Getting Tough With Syria

FrontPageMagazine.com

10/21/03

Steven C. Baker


Shortly after September 11, 2001, President Bush promised the American
people that his administration "will not only deal with those who dare
attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them
and house them." Thus was born a strategy that became a central tenet
of the Global War on Terror: terrorist organizations of global reach
and their state sponsors form a terror nexus that must be defeated
concomitantly.


The state of Syria, however, has escaped serious penalty despite its
demonstrable connections to numerous terrorist entities as well as its
despotic use of occupied Lebanon for the purposes of abetting terror.


To begin, the State Department's Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002
notes that Syria is associated with no less than five terrorist
organizations - all of whom are Designated Foreign Terrorist
Organizations. They include: the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine (PFLP), the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), the Palestine Islamic Jihad
(PIJ), the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) and Hizballah. In
addition, the State Department's report acknowledges that Syria
"continued to permit Iranian resupply, via Damascus, of Hizballah in
Lebanon."


Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad confirmed his country's support for
Palestinian terror during a recent interview with the London daily
Al-Hayat. Assad revealed, among other things, that "The Syrian
position supports the [Palestinian] cause...We do not support one
authority or another. We support the [Palestinian] cause, and our
position is known and has not changed.... we will support the
'resistance' without shame."


The center of that "resistance" activity is based in Syrian-occupied
Lebanon. On September 17, 2003, Lebanese Prime Minister General Michel
Aoun advised the House Committee on International Relations that "One
cannot rationally dissociate the Syrian regime from terrorism. Syria
provides safe haven for a myriad of terrorist organizations, directs
their operations, and uses occupied Lebanon as their main field of
training and operation..."


Moreover, General Aoun had a warning for those in the State Department
and elsewhere who may be lulled into believing that Syria is "with us"
in the War on Terror. He told the Committee that "the suggestion heard
in some circles that these regimes can be charged with the task of
dismantling terrorist organizations is the height of naiveté and
folly....Any perceived cooperation in the war on terrorism does not
represent a strategic choice on the part of the Syrian regime to
combat terrorism; it is only a tactical and temporary ploy to dodge
responsibility for the central role that Syria has had in sponsoring
terrorism during the last three decades. Let us not forget that
Syria's proxies in Lebanon were responsible for attacks against the
American embassy and the Marine compound costing hundreds of Lebanese
and American lives."


Syrian behavior vis-ŕ-vis Iraq is equally troubling. On 9 October
2003, Amb. Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional
Authority (CPA), held a press conference during which he acknowledged
that "We have had foreign fighters and terrorists coming across
particularly the border from Syria, which concerns us." In addition,
Syrian officials "met with a delegation of the [Iraqi] tribes
representing all the classes."


It is clear that Syrian support for terrorism is strategic,
comprehensive and unapologetic. So what can be done to correct this
problem and eliminate a regional and global threat? Enter the Syria
Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003 which
was passed recently by the House of Representatives by a margin of
398-4. Following the vote, the House Majority Leader Tom DeLay
reaffirmed the bill's rationale: "[The Syrian government is] at war
with the values of the civilized world and a violent threat to free
nations and free men everywhere."


In particular, the bill brought to light the fact that even though
Syria is an official state sponsor of terror, fewer sanctions apply to
it than any other country similarly designated. In fact, it has been
widely reported that Syria actually enjoys "normal relations" with the
United States despite these obvious ties to terror. The recent vote is
an attempt to correct these long standing imbalances and to hold Syria
accountable for its actions. It also links the future of U.S.-Syrian
relations to a free Lebanon.


Among the U.S. policies that the Syria Accountability and Lebanese
Sovereignty Restoration Act would make official include the following:


* "Syria will be held responsible for attacks committed by Hizballah
and other terrorist groups with offices or other facilities in Syria,
or bases in areas of Lebanon occupied by Syria;"


* "the United States shall impede Syria's ability to support acts of
international terrorism and efforts to develop or acquire weapons of
mass destruction;"


* "the Secretary of State will continue to list Syria as a state
sponsor of terrorism until Syria ends its support for terrorism,
including its support of Hizballah and other terrorist groups in
Lebanon and its hosting of terrorist groups in Damascus, and comes
into full compliance with United States law relating to terrorism and
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 (September 28, 2001);"


* "efforts against Hizballah will be expanded given the recognition
that Hizballah is equally or more capable than al Qaeda;"


* "the United States will not provide any assistance to Syria and
will oppose multilateral assistance for Syria until Syria withdraws
its armed forces from Lebanon, halts the development and deployment of
weapons of mass destruction and medium and long range surface to
surface..."


(Assad may have been alluding to this last point when he warned an
Al-Hayat reporter during the abovementioned interview that "[Syria] is
not a superpower, but [it] is not a weak country either. We have
cards; we are not a country that can be ignored").


In addition to the aforementioned policy prescriptions, the Syria
Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act would also
give the president several options with which he could mete out
punishment for Syrian transgressions (i.e. to hold them accountable).
These include economic as well as diplomatic sanctions.


With respect to Lebanon, the current bill does not go far enough. For
example, one of the "findings" states that "Since 1990 the Senate and
House of Representatives have passed seven bills and resolutions which
call for the withdrawal of Syrian armed forces from Lebanon." Yet
Syrian troops remain in Lebanon. So it is doubtful that the "sense of
Congress" -- which states that "the Government of Syria should
immediately declare its commitment to completely withdraw its armed
forces, including military, paramilitary, and security forces, from
Lebanon, and set a firm timetable for such withdrawal" -- will lead to
any concrete developments.


This bill is a step in the right direction, but unlike the Iraq
Liberation Act of 1998 - which made a "regime change" in Iraq the
official policy of the U.S. government -- the current bill is likely
to engender only superficial changes in Assad's behavior rather than
actual reform. Without a definitive commitment to change the current
Syrian regime (through all available means), there is little chance
that the aforementioned sanctions will have a significant strategic
effect. Remember, Saddam Hussein was operating under sanctions for
years, yet the threat he posed continued. President Bush should sign
this symbolic act, but it must also adopt a much more active strategy
whose primary goal is the liberation of Lebanon and an end to the
terrorist state of Syria.

Subject: Getting Tough With Syria
From: none