ANALYSIS:The government could escalate military action on the basis that the US is exploiting unrest for its own purposes, writes MICHAEL JANSEN
DAMASCUS WILL not be deterred from pursuing its crackdown on dissent by threats from the US and Britain to impose fresh sanctions on Syria.
Sanctions targeting the regime are largely irrelevant. Washington and London have little economic leverage on Damascus and senior members of the regime are unlikely to have savings or investments in places vulnerable to western pressures.
Limited sanctions imposed by the US since 2004 have failed to force Damascus to drop its support for Hamas, other dissident Palestinian factions opposing Israel and Lebanon’s Hizbullah movement or to renounce its close connection to Tehran, seen by the west as a source of regional instability.
The imposition of sanctions by EU countries could harm the Syrian economy due to increasing trade and tourism. But the regime is unlikely to worry about this while it is involved in what it sees as an existential struggle.
Instead of easing military action against protest centres, the government could very well escalate on suspicion that the US and its allies are exploiting unrest for their own political purposes. A Syrian source living in Beirut told The Irish Times that the latest conspiracy theory going round the exile community holds that the US and Israel are promoting protests to weaken the regime so that it will accept a pro-Israel peace plan due to be proposed by the Obama administration in the autumn.
While this is clearly far-fetched, it reveals that Syrians and perhaps other Arabs believe foreign forces are behind the Syrian uprising.
Although the UN and West have condemned the actions of Damascus, no one in the Arab world expects the West to mount a campaign to protect Syrian civilians comparable to the Libyan mission. Arab League spokesman Hisham Youssef drew a distinction between what is happening in Syria and Col Muammar Gadafy’s use of aircraft and artillery against rebels in the eastern half of the country.
While Mr Youssef said the league favours protection for citizens in “all Arab countries,” he added that the league would have to see “how this could be done”. He said league foreign ministers will be meeting soon to discuss regional developments.
Arab rulers are far less ready to tackle Syrian president Bashar al-Assad than to endorse action against Col Gadafy. Libya is, after all, located in north Africa not in the heart of the eastern Arab world.
There is concern that instability could lead to sectarian warfare in Syria. Christians, Druze, Kurds and members of the Shia offshoot Alawite minority communities fear attack by radical Sunni fundamentalists, Salafis, as well as the emergence of a Muslim Brotherhood or Salafist regime.
Syrian instability could infect neighbouring Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey and the Gulf.
Lebanon, a patchwork of minorities, is vulnerable. “Lebanon’s and Syria’s security is organically linked,” retired Lebanese army general Elias Hanna said. The struggle between pro- and anti-Syrian forces could erupt into violence if the anti-Syrian camp feels itself in a strong position. The Lebanese economy, which relies on transit of exports through Syria, would be devastated.
A triumph of fundamentalist forces in Syria could destabilise Jordan, where the most influential opposition party is the Muslim Brotherhood. The Assad regime has maintained stability along Syria’s border with Israel. Since Israel’s 2006 war on Lebanon and 2008-09 campaign in Gaza, Syria has also urged restraint on Hizbullah and Hamas. An anarchic Syria could enable adventurist elements to strike Israel. The last thing the Arabs want is another war with Israel.