You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Syria rejects Israel's calls to pursue Saudi peace plan
2008-11-02
Syria has rejected calls by President Shimon Peres and Defense Minister Ehud Barak to pursue the 2002 Saudi peace initiative, a plan touted by the more pragmatic moderate Arab elements across the Middle East. The initiative, a broad proposal for a comprehensive solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, calls for Israel's withdrawal from territories captured in 1967 in return from normalized relations with the Arab world.

Syrian embassy spokesman in London Jihad Makdissi called Israel's recent revival of the initiative "another attempt to bluff and evade peace." Makdissi made his remarks in a letter to leading Syrian blog Syria comment. In his letter, he said that any pan-Arab initiative would not let anyone but Syria negotiate with Israel over the fate of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day War.

"As for the notion of weakening Syria and its allies simply by reviving the Arab peace initiative," the Syrian official wrote, "it is not consistent at all because any Pan Arab initiative will not enable any Arab country to negotiate on the Golan on behalf of Syria because comprehensiveness is the broader political umbrella for all tracks and not the substitution."

"All Israeli leaders negotiated with Syria starting with Shamir, until Olmert (whether directly or indirectly), none of them had a clear vision for peace with Syria or genuine conviction of peace per se, except maybe Rabin" Makdissi went on to say.
Posted by:ryuge

#2  That Syrian denial sounds like it's aimed more the Saudis than the Israelis. The back and double back channel messages must be flying - I suspect Syria's got itself in a knot it's trying to untie, but cannot figure out how to without screwing more than one nominal ally.

I wonder if it's really in their interest to remain a frontline state vs. Israel, if the trigger finger is in Tehran instead of Cairo or similarly nearby neighbors.

There may be a slight wedge coming to make arab vs. persian somewhat as distasteful as arab vs. jew. If so, Syria is in much less danger, and only a nominal target of Iran, as opposed to 1st on the list if Israel is attacked.

Syria's exposed.
Posted by: Don Vito Omeling5062   2008-11-02 23:55  

#1  I guess even baby Assad understands Israel's foundation laws better than Olmert (a caretaker government isn't empowered to negotiate treaties).
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2008-11-02 13:43  

00:00