​​​​​​​Countries join and others wait..dissident: opening of two embassies, crossing cannot be called normalization with Damascus

On December 30, 2021, the Kingdom of Bahrain announced the appointment of its first ambassador to Syria in nearly a decade, at a time when Gulf countries work to restore relations with Damascus after ten years cutting them off due to the conflict.

The Sultanate of Oman appointed an ambassador to Damascus last year, and UAE FM, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan visited Damascus at the end of last year, and met Bashar al-Assad, in the first visit of a high-ranking Emirati official since several Gulf states cut diplomatic relations with Damascus.

Jordan leads the way

Jordan assumed the leadership of the path of transformation in Arab politics with Damascus, where there was an exchange of visits between officials and contact between Bashar al-Assad and the Jordanian king.

During the past year, Al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper published a Jordanian document and a secret appendix regarding normalization with the Damascus government.

The document, called "No Paper", states that the ultimate goal of the Arab steps for normalization with Damascus is "the exit of all foreign forces and fighters from Syria who entered the country after 2011", including "the withdrawal of US and coalition forces from northeastern Syria and from a base in Syria".  Al-Tanf, near the borders of Jordan and Iraq, after a series of steps according to a “step for step” approach, including the beginning of “limiting Iranian influence in certain parts of Syria,” while recognizing Russia’s “legitimate interests.”

According to the newspaper, the Jordanian side prepared this plan months ago, and Jordan's King Abdullah II discussed it with US Presidents Joe Biden in Washington in July, and Russian Vladimir Putin in August, and with Arab and foreign leaders.

The document included a review of the past ten years and the policy of Syrian "regime change", before proposing a "gradual change in the behavior of the Syrian regime" after the "failure" in "regime change."

A military resolution for Damascus and the end of the so-called opposition

Observers believe that the war in Syria has been resolved in favor of Damascus since 2018, with the pushing  off mercenary groups from the vicinity of the capital and the nearby province of Daraa - as a result of Russian-Turkish and Russian-Western deals - and that the chances of overthrowing this government militarily have become completely "zero."

Under the impetus of Arab governments, led by the Jordan, a deep debate is taking place among the Arab League about the re-normalization of relations with Damascus, and the return of Syria's suspended seat in the League.

The biggest shift in the Arab position was in 2017, after the mercenary groups lost the battle of Aleppo (north), and during 2018, when they lost the battles of Damascus countryside  and Daraa Governorate (south) and handed over their weapons to Damascus on orders from Turkey and accepted the exit to the Syrian areas occupied by Turkey.

The Syrian opposition, Samir Azzam, saw that the political reason for some Arab Gulf countries to reopen their embassies in Damascus is due to “the fading of the recognition of the 114 countries in the world with the Istanbul Coalition as the sole representative of the Syrian people, which was granted to it in 2012, and after it was proven that the coalition has no representative status for the Syrians, and it only represents Turkish national interests, it is natural for the countries of the world to withdraw their recognition of it.”

Economic goals for Jordan and Lebanon

Experts believe that Jordan, which suffers from a stifling economic crisis that has increased due to the presence of Syrian refugees, incurred great losses when the Syrian crisis began and the European-Gulf transit line that used to pass through Syria was cut off.

The borders between Syria and Jordan were completely reopened to trade at the end of last year, after an exchange of visits between Damascus and Amman government officials and the contact made by Bashar al-Assad with the Jordanian king.

Amman was the driving force behind an agreement to pump Egyptian natural gas to Lebanon through the Syrian border of Daraa, with tacit American approval.

Azzam believes, "Jordan did not cut its diplomatic relations with the regime in the first place, and regarding the opening of the Nassib crossing between Jordan and Syria and allowing the provision of some emergency economic aid from the UAE to the regime, it is done with the tacit approval of the United States so that the Syrian economy and the regime do not collapse completely before forming an alternative acceptable to the general public.  Syrians and accepted by the international community.

Other political goals

In addition to the economic goals, experts believe that there are political goals for this normalization, most notably undermining Iranian influence in Syria, and this was evident in southern Syria.

The course of Arab normalization led by Jordan began when the forces of the Fourth Division of the Damascus government, backed by Iran, began launching attacks on Daraa. The Jordanian king mediated with Russia and the United States to end the tension there and agreed to introduce forces affiliated with Damascus and backed by Russia into Daraa.

This is consistent with the new US policy towards Damascus, which, according to observers, adopts the method of carrots instead of intimidation and threats, as the latest measures aim to provide incentives to Damascus in return for measures required of it on a step-by-step principle.

Will the Arabs reap what they want?

According to the expert community, the political goals of the Arab countries from these measures are to besiege the Iranian influence in the first place and the Turkish influence in the second place, and return Arab activity to the Syrian arena.

However, it seems that Arab policy towards the Syrian situation is still short-sighted and not based on a realistic study, as happened at the beginning of the Syrian crisis, when everything related to the Syrian crisis was placed in the hands of Turkey.

The lack of optimism about the success of this policy is due to several reasons, the most important of which is that the Damascus government views this normalization as well as the reconciliations and settlements it is conducting in the Syrian regions.

Talking about besieging Iranian influence in Syria has become difficult even for Damascus, as Iran is now holding all the cards and potentials of power in the rest of the Syrian state in terms of security agencies, military power and economic interests, in addition to its forces besieging important Syrian sites, including the capital, Damascus.

As for Turkey, which, according to many, represents a greater threat to the unity of Syria and the Arab countries than Iran, since Turkey is working to consolidate its occupation directly and away from any Syrian character, it will not give up and withdraw from Syrian territory without a military force on the ground, and this is what the Arab countries lack  .

Where will the path lead?

Despite this, the path of normalization does not seem stable, as Saudi Arabia kept the door ajar regarding normalization with Damascus, and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said that his country "is not thinking of dealing with the head of the Syrian regime at the present time."

In turn, a spokesman for the US State Department said that Washington does not support Bahrain's steps to normalize relations with Damascus.

He added to the American Al-Hurra channel that "US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, had confirmed in previous media statements that we do not support efforts to rehabilitate Assad."

The spokesman stated that "the United States does not support steps to normalize diplomatic relations with the regime, including the appointment of Bahrain as its ambassador in Damascus, and we will not lift sanctions or support the reconstruction of Syria until irreversible progress is made towards a political solution."

The community of experts has always said that there is no constant in US policy and that what is not subject to change now may become a priority in the coming stages.

This disparity in the American position on Damascus indicates that there is a barter and a political bazaar between Washington and Moscow over Syria, where Washington has cards of power and pressure represented by the military presence in the east of the country, in addition to Caesar's law that exhausts Damascus and Moscow and the imposed international isolation.

Moscow, which was able to achieve a military resolution without reaping the political fruits of that, is seeking an implicit recognition from the United States and the West of the legitimacy of the Damascus government, and despite Western and American statements that talked about the legitimacy of the Russian presence in Syria, this appears to be linked to the conflict outside  Syria too.

Samir Azzam indicated that the situation in Damascus "will not be resolved in the foreseeable future, and the regime will remain as it is now until an alternative acceptable to all Syrians and the international community is formed."

He added: "The West and Israel have the final say in the Syrian crisis, and they consider the conflict in Syria to be a civil war between enemies of the West and Israel, and they are not in a hurry to stop this conflict until the strength of the local parties erodes militarily, politically and financially."

Samir Azzam explained that "the opening of the embassies of two Gulf countries and the opening of a crossing with Jordan cannot be called normalization between the Arab world and the regime.  The organizations listed on the terrorist list in the United Nations and America - focusing on the ceasefire and cessation of violence to prepare the ground for political change - conducting accountability and applying economic sanctions and not recycling the system.

A

ANHA