Ukrainian crisis may help resolve Syrian issue

On March 6, the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on Syria where several experts strongly criticized the Obama administration’s policies in Syria and Ukraine.
It is clear that President Obama’s gamble on diplomacy and partnership with Russia has produced little in Syria and may have encouraged Russia in Ukraine. However, when President Obama visits Saudi Arabia and the region later this month, he may find out that Ukraine crisis may make a solution to the Syrian crisis possible. However complicated and different the two situations may be, there are many parallels. More to the point, Russia’s preoccupation with Ukraine may provide an opening to make progress on Syria.
Although the hearing on March 6 was scheduled originally to discuss Syria, senators and others brought in the crisis in Ukraine, focusing on Russia’s role in both crises. Justifying the inclusion of Ukraine in the hearing, Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, the Committee’s Chairman, said, “Ukraine is the 800-pound gorilla at the moment and we can’t ignore it, nor can we ignore that Russia is a common element in both countries. Russia’s support for Assad in Syria and the Russian invasion and occupation of parts of Ukraine make clear that Putin’s game isn’t 21st-century statesmanship.”
Republican lawmakers, in particular, were scathing in their critique of the Obama administration. Sen. Lindsey Graham, from South Carolina, said: “We have a weak and indecisive president that invites aggression.” Sen. John McCain, from Arizona, said that Obama had “a feckless foreign policy where nobody believes in America’s strength anymore.”
Other Republican members of Congress chimed in. Representative Michael Turner, from Ohio, said: “We’re projecting weakness.” Mike Rogers, from Michigan, Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, was more colorful; accusing the Obama Administration of “playing marbles,” while the Russians were “running circles around us.”
Many in Washington and elsewhere have made the link between US vacillation in Syria and Ukraine developments, making the point that Russia took its cues on Ukraine from American accommodating tendencies in Syria. Seeing American about face regarding Syria, or “reset” in Washington vernacular, as weakness, Russia has all but disregarded any possible reaction from the West to its land grab in Crimea and plans to restore its hegemony over Ukraine.
Bob Corker, the Republican senator from Tennessee, speaking before the Foreign Relations Committee, criticized “the permissive environment that we have created through this reset, thinking that someone like Putin reacts to warmth and charm and reach-out, when what he really reacts to is weakness. I think he has seen that in our foreign policy efforts over the course of this last year.” He added: “I don’t think we can make a case that what happened in Crimea wouldn’t have happened, but I certainly don’t think he has felt that there would be much of a push-back from us.”
While President Obama’s supporters disagreed with calling him feckless or weak, they conceded that his policies have been inconsistent and indecisive on Syria, leading the Russians to take advantage of that state of affairs. Ambassador Fred Hoff, former US special representative on Syria, said, “Our approach to Syria has not discouraged Putin’s approach to Ukraine,” Hoff said.
By contrast, experts see Russia as being consistent. In both Syria and Ukraine, Russia is advancing its national interests ahead of ethical considerations or peaceful solutions, regardless of what the international community, regional powers, or the West may think or believe should be done.
According to this analysis, Russia’s preoccupation with Ukraine, where it has greater interests than in Syria, could provide an opportunity to make progress on Syria.
Although President Obama had agreed last year to try diplomacy, at Russia’s suggestion, to resolve the Syrian crisis, he has lately acknowledged that diplomacy was not working, as the Geneva process has produced nothing and the regime has merely used it for cover, to buy time while escalating its merciless onslaught on the opposition. During the Foreign Relations Committee hearing, US Deputy Secretary of State William Burns acknowledged that the United States had been frustrated about Russia’s unwillingness to pressure the Assad regime, on many issues, including increasing access to humanitarian aid.
After its annexation of Crimea, Russia may seems to encourage separatist moves elsewhere in Ukraine. There already have been numerous pro-Russian demonstrations in eastern parts of Ukraine, where many Ukrainians speak Russian and feel considerable affinity with Russian culture. While few doubt that Russia will ever relinquish Crimea, it may hold eastern Ukraine as a bargaining chip in any future negotiations with Kiev.
As Russia continues its Ukraine gamble and becomes more entangled there, it may be willing to be flexible on Syria, if the US exercises enough pressure to complete the diplomatic process started in Geneva. The Assad regime should be pressured to comply with the terms of Geneva1 regarding the establishment of a new governing authority to oversee the transition toward a future democratic Syria without Assad or his regime. In Geneva2, the regime stonewalled on this issue, claiming that ending terrorism should be a prerequisite to any discussion about future arrangements. Russia supported that sequencing.
As the Obama administration acknowledges that diplomacy is not working in Syria and as Russia seems to rely on military power to achieve its strategic objectives in Ukraine, this may be the time for another “reset” in US policy toward Syria. Arming moderate opposition forces would improve chances of a diplomatic solution, because diplomacy alone could not persuade the Assad regime to negotiate seriously with the opposition. At the same time, arming the moderates would help counter the influence of extremists in Syria.

Email: [email protected]