A New Way Forward?

The Obama administration signaled a change in Middle East diplomacy when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the State Department would send two envoys to Damascus to meet with Syrian leadership, the first such visit since 2005.

On Saturday, the two emissaries – Daniel Shapiro, a senior director of the National Security Council, and Jeffrey Feltman, acting secretary for Near Eastern affairs – arrived in Syria and reportedly met for four hours with Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem and other officials.

Such a move clearly indicates the Obama administration’s desire to address several ongoing and interconnected regional problems: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, tensions between Israel and Syria and Syria’s continued support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine.

Also implicit is a desire to curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions: Syria has maintained close ties with Tehran, and clearly the administration hopes that by strengthening ties with Syria, it might put further pressure on Iran.

Most significantly, the gesture signals the administration’s intent to make good on President Barack Obama’s campaign promise of engagement with all governments, even those considered long-standing adversaries.

We are optimistic about the administration’s decision to engage with countries such as Syria and Iran.

For far too long, bombs and bombast have been utilized in lieu of thoughtful and concerted diplomatic discourse.

Obama and his team seem to have the presence of mind to recognize that, despite their antagonistic stance toward the West, Syria and Iran are major regional powers.

Only by mending ties and making them key players in the process can the United States hope to attain a sustainable peace in the region.

However, optimism should remain tempered in light of the challenges that remain.
Diplomatic breakthroughs have been few and far between in the region, and change
has mostly been incremental.

Furthermore, several immediate roadblocks to fruitful conversation still remain.

First is the contention between Israel and Syria over the Golan Heights: Syria insists that Israel withdraw from the hotly contested region to the boundary established by the Six-Day War of 1967 as precondition for discussion, a concession the Israelis are unwilling to make.

Next is the ongoing situation in the Gaza Strip. Despite the Jan. 18 cease-fire, the Israelis have maintained a blockade on border crossings into the region.

 The United States, for its part, has largely failed to acknowledge the crisis, while Israeli Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu has voiced opposition to a two-state solution.

Clearly some of the foreign leaders whom the United States would like to woo have taken note.

In his first public comments on the matter Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, accused Obama of adopting the previous administration’s stance on Israel – anathema to most Middle Eastern regimes.

Nevertheless, opening discussions with heretofore rogue states such as Syria and Iran offers a promising departure from the previous administration’s policy towards the region – and a new way forward in attaining future peace.