Iraq key to US-Syria rapprochement

After five years in which there was almost no diplomatic communication between Syria and the US, the Obama administration has finally decided to appoint a new ambassador to Damascus. The nominee for the ambassadorial post is none other than the current deputy ambassador to Iraq, Robert Ford. The nomination shows the central importance of Iraq in US-Syria relations. Iraq was the key factor that led to the confrontation between the two countries; now it is the force behind their rapprochement.

When the US decided to invade Iraq, Syria openly opposed the idea. When US tanks rolled into Baghdad in April 2003, Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, in an interview with the Arab media, stated that he hoped the invasion of Iraq would fail and that "popular resistance" would prevent the US from controlling the country.

Domestic and national security factors informed the Syrian position. Syria thought that it was next on the US hit-list; hence, it supported the resistance. It was accused of allowing foreign fighters to cross its borders and enter Iraq, as well as hosting senior members of the former Iraqi regime. In the summer of 2004, Syria started to reconsider its policy, partly because of US pressure but largely because of a new definition of its national interests. The increasing violence in Iraq and the growing influence of extremist groups — Al Qaida and the like — played a key role in reshaping Syrian policy.

In the autumn of 2005, Syria reinforced its military presence along its border with Iraq, deploying some 7,000 extra troops to stop would-be infiltrators seeking to join the anti-American insurgency. In addition, as a show of good faith, Damascus allowed Iraqi candidates for the legislative elections to campaign for the votes of approximately 1.5 million Iraqis living in Syria. This was a clear departure from the original Syrian policy, which opposed the US invasion and everything resulting from it.

In 2006, Syria recognised the Nouri Al Maliki government and re-established diplomatic relations with Baghdad. And increasingly, observers started to see agreement and an overlap of interests between the US and Syria.

Common ground

From mid-2007, Syria and the US, not withstanding the hostile rhetoric of the Bush administration, started to speak the same language on Iraq. The two sides discovered that on this particular issue they could increase co-operation and prevent their relationship from deteriorating.

From that time on, Syria started to show genuine interest in the establishment of a strong central government in Baghdad. For Damascus this was a key requirement to prevent the potential disintegration of the country and the emergence of confessional-based mini-states. To this end, Syria lobbied for the inclusion of the major Sunni powers in the political process. A formula of power and wealth sharing was seen as being essential to get all the parties involved in a national reconciliation process. Reconsidering the de-Baathification law was also seen as a prerequisite for the success of this process. As a secular country, Syria was concerned about the activities of extremists in Iraq and feared a spillover of violence. For Damascus, Iraq might very well turn into another Afghanistan — a breeding ground for extremists. By the same token, it made no efforts to hide its displeasure with Iran's policies in Iraq and suspected that Tehran might well be trying to break up the country and finish once and for all a formidable enemy in the region. In addition, Syria has never called for an immediate US pullout from Iraq, but shown interest in seeing a reasonable timetable for withdrawal.

As Iraq's March 7 general elections draw closer, Washington has been doing what Damascus truly wishes for: encouraging the inclusion of all political parties in the electoral process, providing a reasonable level of stability and security and preventing sectarian violence or partition along ethnic lines.

Syria still, of course, hopes for the smooth withdrawal of all American troops according to the timetable set out in the US-Iraqi security agreement.

Indeed, there are a number of differences between the two countries, such as disagreements over the pace of US withdrawal and Syria's strong ties with elements of the former Iraqi regime. Yet, these differences are not insurmountable and could be easily overcome should the two countries agree on an overall strategy to co-operate to stabilise Iraq. That should be the main role of the new US ambassador to Damascus as five years of frigidity come to an end.

Dr Marwan Al Kabalan is a lecturer in media and international relations at the faculty of Political Science and Media, Damascus University, Syria.