Yet another denial of truth

April 1 2007

Yet another denial of truth



IF you are sincere when you say you are open for a diplomatic solution to a crisis, then why should you object to an approach to dialogue that could possibly help open new avenues for a solution? That is the key question that the Bush administration should answer following its criticism of plans by US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi to visit Syria and possibly meet President Bashar Al Assad.
It is yet again denial by the Bush administration, which is not ready to recognise that Syria, like other Arabs in the region, has a genuine cause: Liberation of its Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.
Dealing with Syria as a sovereign country entitled to all rights of a UN member state means applying logic, reason and international legitimacy to assess its position. If the Bush administration opted to do that, then it would be alienating its "strategic partner" in the region — Israel.
As such, the White House does not want anything to do with Syria. It has steadfastly refused to open a dialogue with Syria with a view to securing Syrian help in containing the insurgeny in Iraq in return for launching a sincere effort to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Dialogue with Syria was recommended by the Iraq Study Group headed by veteran diplomat James Baker, but the White House ruled that out even before Baker formally released his report.
A team of Republican and Democratic members of Congress visited Damascus and met President Assad in December against the backdrop of the Baker report.
The mission was condemned by the White House.
Now, the White House says it is not a good idea for Pelosi to visit Syria and hold talks with President Assad.
"We don't think it's a good idea," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. "This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the Siniora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow into Iraq from its borders."
Let us take the US charges on their face value. Then it becomes all the more puzzling to see how the Bush administration intends to go about if it genuinely wants Syria help to end what it calls "state-sponsored terrorism," find a solution to the political crisis in Lebanon and check the insurgency in Iraq.
Syria has repeatedly affirmed that it is ready for an all-embracing dialogue with the US with a view to addressing the fundamental differences with them.
The Syrian position, coupled with Baker's expert recommendation, offers a perfect setting for Pelosi to launch a new initiative. Her office has acknowledged it.
Indeed, the White House, already in trouble with the Democrats dominating the US legislature, might not want to offer Pelosi any opening to score political points.
The White House is deliberately playing down the Syrian offer of dialogue by ridiculing President Assad. It is evident in the words of spokeswoman Perino: "I know that Assad probably really loves people to come and have a photo opportunity and have tea with him and have discussions about where they're coming from."
Well, by maintaining its stubborn refusal to acknowledge ground realities and accept the course of logic, reason and diplomacy in dealing with Syria, the Bush administration is wasting yet another opportunity to help advance the cause of peace in the Middle East.