The US can do very little about the difficulties of the Special Lebanese Tribunal and Saad Hariri’s need to back away from its results. The Lebanese pendulum is returning to its equilibrium. Syria’s and Hizbullah’s authority in Lebanon is being restored after the effort by George Bush, Jacques Chirac, and Ehud Olmert to yank it out of Syria’s orbit in 2004 – 2006. The Special Tribunal was a device conceived of by George Bush to use international law and Western institutional clout to hog tie Syria and Hizbullah. It was of a piece with UN resolution 1559 and the other Security Council resolutions. They were designed to mobilize international law against Syria and Hizbullah and to help bring Lebanon into America’s orbit. The effort failed.

Rafiq Hariri, Lebanon’s strong man, was assassinated because he switched sides. We do not know how Bush and Chirac enticed him to abandon Syria, the country that had helped him to power in Lebanon. Presumably Bush turned to the Saudis and the French to convince him. What assurances of protection were promised Hariri by Ameirca’s president, we do not know. They did not stop Hariri’s murder. We do know that Rafiq Hariri was scared that he would not survive the Bush gambit. Only 22 years earlier Bashir Gemayyel, the Lebanese strongman that the Israeli’s made president in order to sign a peace agreement with Israel, was blown up in similar circumstances. Israel’s effort to wrench Lebanon out of Syria’s orbit collapsed in the same way that America’s effort to do the same thing has failed.

When Hizbullah soldiers marched into West Beirut in May 2008 to surround Saad Hariri’s offices and demonstrate that they were in control and that the Lebanese army would lift not a finger to oppose Hizbullah, no one could question that Syria and Hizbullah were back in control. George Bush and the US military stood by and watched. They were not going to repeat Ronald Reagan’s mistake of sending marines into Beirut. Saad Hariri discovered that he had no power and that Washington would not and could not back him up.

Now American State Department officials are clamoring that Syria and Hizbullah must recognize the SLT and that Prime Minister Hariri must act on any indictments and use the authority of the Lebanese state and security forces to arrest them. It is not going to happen. If Rafiq Hariri gives such and order, he would be a fool. America will not be able to back him up. He must feel compelled to find a face saving way to finesse this last effort by Washington to re-animate the Bush era effort to drive Syrian influence out of Lebanon and destroy Hizbullah.

If the US is serious about the peace process in Palestine, it will need Syrian help.
Despite US Effort, Syrian Mideast Role On The Rise – CBS News

Syria Rebuilds Mideast Clout, Shrugs Off US Incentives And Pressure To Shun Iran, Hezbollah
Syria has bounced back from years of international isolation and is wielding its influence in crises around the Middle East, shrugging off U.S. attempts to pull it away from its alliances with Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.

Damascus played a role in helping Iraq’s fractious politicians agree this month to form a new government after eight months of deadlock. Now with Lebanon’s factions heading for a possible new violent collision, Arabs have had to turn to Syria in hopes of ensuring peace, even as Damascus backs Lebanon’s heaviest armed player, the Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

Washington has increasingly expressed its frustration with Syria, which it says is stirring up tension through its support of Hezbollah. Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Syria’s behavior “has not met our hopes and expectations” over the past 20 months and that it has “not met its international obligations.”

Since 2005, Washington – along with its Arab allies – hoped to squeeze Syrian influence out of its smaller neighbor Lebanon. But Arab powers that once shunned Damascus, particularly Saudi Arabia, have had to acknowledge its regional weight.

This month, Syrian and Saudi officials have been holding talks trying to avert an explosion in Lebanon. It’s a remarkable turnaround from several years ago, when the two countries were locked in a bitter rivalry and an outright personal feud between their leaders, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Saudi King Abdullah.

Fears of violence in Lebanon are high because an international tribunal investigating the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri is expected soon to indict members of Hezbollah.

Many Lebanese fear that could break the country’s fragile unity government grouping Hezbollah and pro-Western parties loyal to Hariri’s son, Saad, who is the current prime minister, and even lead to clashes between the two sides. With Syria’s backing, Hezbollah demands Saad Hariri break off Lebanon’s ties with the tribunal.

Little is known about the Syrian-Saudi talks, but Lebanon’s daily As-Safir reported Monday that the contacts have produced a five-point compromise plan in which Hariri, a close Saudi ally, is likely to declare Hezbollah innocent of the assassination once the tribunal issues indictments.

Such a deal would be a setback for Washington, which has pressed for support of the tribunal, and for pro-U.S. factions in Lebanon who fear the country is coming under Hezbollah’s thumb. But it would mark a new success for Syria and illustrate how it has come to restore its regional clout largely on its own terms.

It has done so while ignoring incentives from Washington. President Barack Obama has made repeated overtures to Damascus this year, nominating the first U.S. ambassador to Syria since 2005 and sending top diplomats to meet with Assad, in hopes of swaying it away from its alliance with Iran and regional militant groups.

Still, “Syria did not abandon Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah or its principles regarding the (Mideast) peace process,” said Sami Moubayed, a Syrian political analyst who is the editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine.

Relations with Washington have now chilled before they even had a chance to fully warm up. Last month, Assad accused the United States of sowing chaos around the world.

“Is Afghanistan stable? Is Somalia stable? Did they bring stability to Lebanon in 1983?” Bashar Assad told Al-Hayat newspaper, referring to U.S. intervention in Lebanon’s 15-year civil war, which ended in 1990.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice in turn accused Syria of displaying “flagrant disregard” for Lebanon’s sovereignty, citing its provision of increasingly sophisticated weapons to Hezbollah and other militias in violation of a U.N. resolution.

“Hezbollah remains the most significant and most heavily armed Lebanese militia,” Rice said on Oct. 28. “It could not have done so if not for Syria’s aid, and facilitation of Syrian and Iranian arms.” Iran funds the militant group to the tune of millions of dollars a year and is believed to supply much of its arsenal.

As it spurns moves by the U.S., Damascus is making friends elsewhere – and not just with staunch anti-American governments such as Iran and Venezuela, whose President Hugo Chavez swung through Damascus in October.

Iraqi leaders looked to Syria for help in solving the political stalemate stemming from March parliamentary elections, which failed to produce a clear winner. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who along with other prominent Iraqi officials made a trip to Damascus, is expected to form a new government after last week’s deal broke the political impasse.

Syria’s emergence as a regional heavyweight is a reversal from just a few years ago. Rafik Hariri’s assassination prompted a wave of anti-Syrian protests that forced Damascus to withdraw its military from Lebanon and end its long control there. In 2006, relations with some Arab states took a dive when Assad called Saudi King Abdullah and other Arab leaders “half men” over their disapproval of Hezbollah’s capture of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid, which sparked a 34-day war between Hezbollah and Israel.

Syria could benefit from improved ties with Washington, which would boost its economy and end sanctions first imposed by President George W. Bush. Assad also wants U.S. mediation in indirect peace talks with Israel – a recognition that he needs Washington’s help to win the return of the Golan Heights, seized by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war.

But after rebuilding its regional status, it may feel less of a need to pay the price for better ties. Syria has “turned the page on isolation” by building its partnership with Saudi Arabia and asserting a role in Iraq, Peter Harling, a Syria-based Mideast analyst with the International Crisis Group, says.

“Syria has been doing well in a region that has not.”

I am not sure what to make of the Bar’el article. It is smart but I we have no evidence that the Syrian government double crossed Iran as he claims it did. I wouldn’t believe it without proof. Lebanese sources have a long history of misinformation about infighting within the Asad family and between Iran and Syria and between Hizbullah and Syria. Almost all of them have turned out to be false. We were told that Syria killed Mughniya, when it was almost asuredly Israel – perhaps with US assistance. We were told that the Assad family was at daggers drawn, with Assaf Shawkat out of favor and Bushra in exile. Not true. These perennial stories of intrigue and treachery are the products of wishful thinking and mischievous minds seeking to assure opponents of Syria and Hizbullah that if they refuse to cooperated with Damascus and Nasrallah, they will be rewarded by a sudden collapse of the Iran-Syria-Hizb alliance. It is not likely to happen. They make for good copy but Iran and Syria are not double crossing each other in this way. No alliance could withstand it for 30 years as the Syrian-Iranian alliance has.

Are relations between Syria and Iran cooling off?
New article in Asharq Al Awsat reveals Syria apparently was responsible for confiscating a large shipment of explosives that Iran was planning to send to Hezbollah.
By Zvi Bar’el

Tehran and Damascus were able to trust each other so long as it was clear that the other was not planning to encroach on its sphere of influence. Just as Syria does not intervene publicly or ostentatiously in Iraqi affairs – an area considered to be under Iranian influence – so Damascus expects Tehran to refrain from intervening too crudely in Lebanese affairs, at least not in a manner that portrays Lebanon as an Iranian protectorate rather than a Syrian one. But Ahmadinejad’s visit to Lebanon, the presence of Revolutionary Guards there, and the transfer of explosive materials from Iran to Syria in a way that puts Damascus under scrutiny by the committee examining sanctions against Iran, raise questions about the quality of relations between the two countries. ….

Syria would like to leave Hezbollah as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Saudi Arabia over the international committee looking into the murder of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese president assassinated in 2005, or as a reward for Israel in case of a peace agreement. But Iran has other plans. It would like Lebanon to become an Iranian protectorate, through Hezbollah. …. Hezbollah and Syria will not cooperate with the international tribunal hearing the Hariri case, but neither will Assad permit Lebanon to be shattered.

Syria and America: The End of the Honeymoon Period
Saturday 06 November 2010
By Tariq Alhomayed

It seems that the American – Syrian honeymoon has come to an end, and to make matters worse, the Republican Party has gained control of the US Congress following this week’s mid-term elections. Damascus wasted two years of Obama’s presidency, failing to achieve anything; during this period the Syrians dealt with Washington in the same manner that they deal with certain Arab countries, and this is something that can be seen in their response to the statement made by US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman, in which Damascus called on Feltman to “recognize historical and geographical facts.”
Two years after Washington extended its hand to Damascus, the US is outraged by the Syrian behavior in Lebanon, with the Americans believing that Damascus is contributing to undermining security and stability there. This is something expressed by US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, and Feltman himself reiterated this in his statement that provoked the Syrians. If we add a Republican-controlled Congress to this equation, then we can say that Obama cannot continue opening up to Syrian in this manner, especially as there have long been demands in Washington that the US reassess the manner in which it is dealing with Syria.

Syria has not met US hopes: Clinton (AFP)

WASHINGTON — Syria has failed to meet Washington’s hopes since the Obama administration started to engage with the former US foe, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in an interview published Friday. “Syria’s behavior has not met our hopes and expectations over the past 20 months — and Syria’s actions have not met its international obligations,” the chief US diplomat told the Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar.

Syrian bloggers brace for fresh blow to Middle East press freedom
The Christian Science Monitor -By Sarah Birke, November 16, 2010

A Syrian law awaiting parliamentary approval is one of a raft of measures across the region to clamp down on a surge in Internet activity over the past decade.

The Middle East’s modest window for dissent, created by a surge in blogging and online journalism over the past decade, looks poised to narrow with a raft of measures across the region.

A draft Internet law awaiting parliamentary approval in Syria is one such measure. The government says it would give a needed legal framework to online activity by forcing bloggers to register as union members, conferring rights such as a press card to online journalists for the first time, and potentially requiring content be withdrawn from websites.

Online journalists and bloggers in Syria, already subject to harassment and imprisonment, are concerned that the law is designed to crack down on their activities and restrict freedom of expression. Media analysts say parliamentary approval is likely to come soon.

Since Syria’s online sphere began to blossom in 2000, Syrian websites – which face less scrutiny than the country’s print media – have been able to publish stories on sensitive subjects such as the army and corruption. They have recently brought to light a controversial personal status law and the issue of corporal punishment.

“We have democratized information and flagged up sensitive and important topics for debate, both controversial and non-controversial,” says Abdel Ayman Nour, the editor of All4Syria, a news website run from outside the country which as well as writing about politics has actively campaigned about neglected topics such as the environment. “But a law that stipulates that police can enter the office of a website to take journalists for questioning, seize their computers, and impose penalties of jail or a fine of up to 1 million Syrian pounds [$200,000] is clearly designed to end that.”
New media push boundaries

The Middle East has long been known as one of the least liberal regions for media freedoms in the world, though the advent of new media forms has pushed the boundaries of media restrictions and made governments more accountable to their citizens.

“The satellite revolution and the launch of private television in the 1990s made it harder to censor content,” says Naila Hamdy, a former journalist who now teaches at the American University in Cairo. “Now the Internet, which was formerly used only by a handful of people, has exploded, challenging traditional government-controlled media.”

But Middle Eastern countries pushed back as Internet usage surged 13-fold from 2000 to 2008. A 2009 report by the Committee to Protect Journalists detailed the tailoring of press laws and the introduction of new laws across the region, including measures such as the United Arab Emirates’ Cyber Crime Law that stipulates $5,400 fines and prison sentences for vague online acts such as insulting family values.

Egypt, in the run-up to Nov. 28 parliamentary elections and the presidential election next year, has imposed restrictions on the press. Satellite television stations must now request a license before broadcasting a live event, as must companies engaging in mass text messaging.

But Syria is ranked even worse than Egypt on this year’s annual press freedom chart by Reporters without Borders. The international organization based in Paris put Syria at 173 out of 178 countries, just behind Sudan and China, and beating out only Iran and a handful of others.
Defamation is concern, say governments

Syrian websites espousing harsh political criticism, such as All4Syria, are blocked along with some human rights and social networking sites such as YouTube and Facebook – although most Syrians use proxy software to access them. Many publications are subject to censorship.

But this is not a complete picture, say analysts. Taleb Kadi Amin, director of the Arab Radio & TV training center in Damascus and former deputy information minister, says the Syrian law is part of a global trend to regulate the Internet and deal with negative effects such as violations of copyright law.

“This law is simply designed to tell online journalists that they are responsible for what they write,” he says. “Many websites copy and paste material and publish defamatory or untrue material, often anonymously, and there is currently no mechanism to deal with it.”

“It is not about limiting freedom of expression but giving support to legitimate online journalists and increasing people’s rights not to be defamed,” he added.

But such laws include a risk of abuse, say analysts. “The challenge is promulgating a law that cannot be used to silence dissent,” says Professor Hamdy.
More anxiety for journalists

Syrian bloggers claim the new regulations will lead them to self-censor, write anonymously, or leave the country, which will lower their credibility, but some say the law will have little consequence.

“The Internet is almost impossible to police and Syria and other countries already mete out penalties without a specific law,” says Joshua Landis, a Syria expert at Oklahoma University. “It will, however, add another layer of anxiety for journalists.”

Professor Landis, operator of the blog Syria Comment, adds that it was in the interest of all countries to have a free press, including Syria.

“It is necessary for the economic liberalization desired by Syria,” he says. “Many officials realize that debating difficult topics such as the removal of subsidies and salary disparities is more likely to get people onside with painful but needed reforms.”

Israel pullback alarms Lebanon border town
By Douglas Hamilton
GHAJAR, Israel | Wed Nov 17, 2010

A woman walks past concrete security blocks in the village of Ghajar on the Israeli-Lebanese border November 7, 2010. Reuters/Nir Elias

GHAJAR, Israel (Reuters) – Israel said on Wednesday it would withdraw troops from a village straddling the Lebanese border, in a gesture to the United Nations that drew residents onto the streets protesting the division of their community.

The people of Ghajar, a prosperous hillside town of 2,300 who are members of Syria’s Alawite sect, say they want no “Berlin Wall” dividing the north from the south of their village and forcing them to chose between Lebanon or Israel.

They say they were not consulted on U.N. plans to resolve a situation that has long inflamed tensions between Israel, the Lebanese Hezbollah guerrilla group and neighboring Syria.

“We don’t know what’s going to happen when the Israelis pull back. We’re afraid the village will be cut in two, and in Ghajar we’re all one big family,” said local council head Ahmed Fatali.

Morocco and Syria have the highest SMS rates in the Arab World
2010-11-18

New research from the Arab Advisors Group reveals that 87% of Arab cellular operators provide the MMS service. The SMS service, which is provided by all mobile operators in the region, is priced quite differently across the region. Yemen and Palestine have the lowest average SMS rates, while Morocco and Syria have the highest.

Lebanon PM: Army to get assistance from Russia
The Associated Press

Russia will provide the Lebanese army with free helicopters, tanks and munitions in a deal that will boost the country’s poorly equipped military, officials said Tuesday. The announcement comes at a time when military assistance to Lebanon is under scrutiny after U.S. lawmakers demanded assurances that American aid will not fall into the hands of Hezbollah.

Robert Fisk: How Lebanon can’t escape the shadow of Hariri’s murder

Madame Clinton has been on the phone to Hariri, nagging him to disarm Hezbollah and to stick to the tribunal. In Washington, this makes sense. In Lebanon, she sounds as if she is mad.

Why? Shiites are the largest community in Lebanon, yet their sons and brothers make up a majority of the Lebanese national army.

It’s not that the Hezbollah have infiltrated the ranks. It’s just that since the Christian and Sunni elites have maintained the Shiites in comparative poverty, the youngest sons need a job and are sent off to the army.
… If they were indeed ordered to march south…. are they going to shoot their Hezbollah brothers, fathers and cousins to a chorus of White House cheers?

No, they would refuse and the Christian-Sunni soldiers would be tasked to attack the armed Shiites. The army would split. That’s how the civil war started in 1975.

Does Madame Clinton – and France’s foppish foreign minister, the saintly Bernard Kouchner who has turned up in Beirut to support the tribunal – want another civil war in Lebanon?

There’s another problem. Given their numbers, the Shiites are grossly under-represented in the Lebanese parliament and government. And there’s been an unspoken – certainly unwritten – agreement in Beirut that to compensate for their lack of political power, the Shiites can have a militia.

If God was to tell Nasrallah to disarm the Hezbollah – he would surely obey, for no-one else in the region would dare to make such a request – then Nasrallah would immediately demand an increase in Shiite numbers in government, commensurate with his perhaps 42 per cent of the population. There would, therefore, in effect, be a Shiite government in Lebanon.

Is that what Clinton and poor old Obama want? Another Shiite Arab state to add to the creation of the Shiite Iraqi state which they have bestowed upon the Saudis and the rest of the Arab Sunnis as a neighbour?

In Schenker’s article about China (copied below), he omits one fact. Iran and Syria are forced to look to China because America has closed all doors to them and is sanctioning them. Turkey does not have to look East, but if it wants to trade with Iran and cultivate good relations with Russia, Syria and the neighborhood, it cannot afford to remain so dependent on the US and Israel for its defense and economic needs. What is more, Turkey was excluded from the EU; America’s closest ally just killed 9 of its citizens. These are all reasons that turkey is increasingly looking East to Russia and China. It does not want to alienate its new friends, who ahve the potential to help drive its economy forward. The US is insisting that Turkey sanction Iran, a 10 billion dollar a year trading partner. Asia is the future. In 2008, Asian nations as a group passed the United States with $387 billion in research and development spending, compared with $384 billion in the United States and $280 billion in Europe.

Every Middle Eastern country is beginning to make calculations similar to Turkey’s. They are discounting US power and counting on China and India to be able to soften US sanctions in the future. The US should not be following use more sanctions and more sticks to force regional states into capitulating to US and Israeli demands. Instead, the US should soften its diplomacy in the region. Most importantly, it should back away from confrontation with Iran. It should also avoid greater conflict with Turkey. Using sanctions as its main tool of diplomacy with Syria and Iran is isolating the US and producing deep resentments in the region that will inevitably find a way to express themselves as anti-Americanism.

The most compelling argument against using sanctions, is that they produce the wrong outcome. They are counter productive because they make Middle Easterners poorer. The only real solution for improved US – Middle East relations is growing a bigger middle class.  Only when Middle Easterners are better educated and better integrated into the global economy will we see serious movement toward democracy and liberalism in the region. The US should apply the same logic it applies to China to the Middle East: more prosperity will eventually lead to a more democratic regime and better relations.

It is worth reading Fareed Zakaria on this question in today’s Washington Post.  I had dinner with him on Monday, when he visited the University of Oklahoma and we discussed the wisdom America’s decision to make Iran its number one security threat and arm twist regional powers such as Turkey, India and Russia to sanction it. He writes about sanctions and containment, as follows.

By undertaking this trip to India, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia, Obama was making America’s opening move in a new great power game unfolding in Asia. Until now, China’s rise had been talked about more as an abstraction. But events over the past few months have made the rise of China tangible in the eyes of many Asians. They are watching how the United States will react. The right reaction is not containment….

China’s Rise in the Middle East
BY: DAVID SCHENKER AND CHRISTINA LIN | LOS ANGELES TIMES

It’s unrealistic to expect that Washington could have excluded Beijing from the Middle East. But the rate of Chinese progress occurs amid a perception that the U.S. is withdrawing from the region.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was in China this month touting the “new cooperation paradigm” between Ankara and Beijing. Just a week earlier, a top political advisor to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao spent five days in Syria signing deals and planting olive trees in the Golan Heights. The Middle Kingdom, it seems, is planting deep roots in the Middle East these days.

The reach of the People’s Republic is far and wide, extending from the Far East to Africa to Latin America, and its interest in the Middle East is neither new nor surprising: China gets more than a quarter of its oil imports from the Persian Gulf and has billions invested in Iran’s oil sector. Recently, though, Beijing appears to be making greater headway, a development fueled by Washington’s creeping withdrawal from the region.

Starting in the 1990s, China filled a void in Syria left by a decaying Soviet Union, providing the terrorist state with a variety of missiles. Today, Syrian President Bashar Assad is fulfilling his 2004 pledge to “look East” toward Asia to escape the Western hold on the Middle East. In addition to serving as an ongoing and reliable source of weapons, China has invested heavily in modernizing Syria’s antiquated energy sector.

More striking, however, has been Beijing’s rapid inroads with the Islamist government in Ankara headed by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In October, Wen was the first Chinese premier to visit Turkey in eight years. Erdogan and Wen inked eight deals, including an agreement to transform the ancient SilkRoad into a “Silk Railway” linking China and Turkey.

Of more concern than the budding economic relationship, however, is the nascent military relationship between NATO partner Turkey and China. The most recent manifestation of these ties was the unprecedented inclusion in October of Chinese warplanes in the Turkish military exercise Anatolian Eagle, maneuvers that previously had included the U.S. and Israel.

Although Turkey reportedly left its modern U.S.-built F-16s in their hangars during the exercises and instead flew its F-4s, which the U.S. Air Force retired from service in 1996, the damage was done. Chinese participation in the exercise exacerbated the already extant crisis of confidence between Washington and its NATO partner. The joint announcement in October that China and Turkey had formally upgraded their bilateral relationship to that of a “strategic partnership” only makes matters worse.

Beijing did not choose Iran, Syria and Turkey as the focal point of its regional “outreach” by accident. These northern-tier Middle Eastern states all have complicated if not problematic relations with the United States and increasingly close ties with one another. To complement this triumvirate, China appears to be looking to Iraq as the next target of its charm offensive.

China is the leading oil and gas investor in Iraq, and it is paying millions to protect its investment there. That’s not surprising since Iraq has the world’s largest known oil reserves. China has also purchased extensive goodwill with Baghdad by forgiving $6 billion to $8 billion in Iraqi debt accrued during the Saddam Hussein era. And Beijing has gotten in on the sale of weapons — worth in excess of $100 million — to the new government in Baghdad….

Turkey objects to Iran-centric Nato shield

“… As negotiations on a missile defence shield enter their final days before a Nato leaders’ meeting in Lisbon, Turkey is turning out to be more of a problem to the alliance than Russia, whose hostile attitude towards its former Cold War enemy is starting to fade.

One of the main sticking points in agreeing the final text of Nato’s new strategic concept is the language in which countries describe the potential missile threats to Europe, EUobserver has learned.
Despite being one of the early members of the military alliance which it joined in 1952, Turkey has grown increasingly at odds with its Western allies as it seeks closer ties to its eastern neighbours Iran and Syria, which the US and also some European allies, such as France, want to name as threats.

Not mentioning the Middle Eastern hotspots would create renewed difficulties with Russia, Nato diplomats say, just as Moscow has started to give signs that it no longer considers the shield to be directed against itself.
Other Nato sources say that “it is not Turkey alone” which is creating a problem for the shield, but a broader “nexus” of issues connected to missile defence, such as France’s reluctance to join the aim of a “nuclear-free world” and Germany’s insistance on nuclear disarmament….”

Tehran Sets Deadline For India

“…India, fresh off a visit by US President Barack Obama, is being put in a dilemma by the Iranian government which says it has until the end of December to put up or shut up about its proposed investments in Iran’s rich South Pars gas field.

A senior official at the petroleum ministry told Asia Sentinel that it is a “tough ask for New Delhi to balance India’s energy needs with America’s discomfort about any country doing business with Iran.”
Although contracts have been signed, the money that has flowed so far has not been enough to invite US sanctions. However, this will need to change if the South Pars project is to move forward.

Roger Cohen argues that Hillary Clinton will be successful in negotiating a just two state solution to the Arab-Palestinian conflict. Few others respond to the latest Washignton offer to Israel in such a positive light. Read Hitchen’s article which follows Cohen’s.

Madam Secretary’s Middle East
BY: ROGER COHEN | THE NEW YORK TIMES

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken charge…. The heavy lifting is now in Clinton’s hands. Officials in Washington, Jerusalem and Ramallah tell me that the secretary of state will lead what her husband recently called the attempt to “finish Rabin’s work.”

“She’s not insecure about Israel, she will call the shots as she sees them,” a senior U.S. official said. “And she would not be engaged if she did not feel there was a way to get there.”

Clinton’s new role was evident last week. During a video conference with Fayyad, she announced $150 million in direct U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority (and said America was “deeply disappointed” by “counterproductive” Israeli housing plans in East Jerusalem). The next day she went into nearly eight hours of talk with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that opened the negotiations door a crack.

Before I get to that, some background. The Clinton of today is not the Clinton of a decade ago. Compare that sharp criticism of Israel’s East Jerusalem building with her 1999 position that Jerusalem is “the eternal and indivisible capital of Israel.” Somewhere in the past decade her conviction hardened that the state of Palestine is achievable, inevitable and compatible with Israeli security.

“A bit of an epiphany,” in the words of one aide, came in March 2009 on the road to Ramallah. “We drove in a motorcade and you could see the settlements high up, and the brutality of it was so stark,” this aide said. “Everyone got quite silent and as we approached Ramallah there were these troops in berets. They were so professional, we thought at first they were Israel Defense Forces. But, no, they were Palestinians, this completely professional outfit, and it was clear this was something new.”

That “something” is fundamental: the transition from a self-pitying, self-dramatizing Palestinian psyche, with all the cloying accoutrements of victimhood, to a self-affirming culture of pragmatism and institution-building. The shift is incomplete. But it has won Clinton over. And it’s powerful enough to pose a whole new set of challenges to Israel: Palestine is serious now.

Another moment came in September 2010 when Clinton held a meeting with Fayyad that threw her schedule off because it ran so long. Fayyad is Mr. Self-Empowerment, the Palestinian who, at last, has put facts before “narrative,” growth before grumbling, roads before ranting, and security before everything. Clinton, I was told, has “strong views” on Fayyad. She said last week she had “great confidence” in him….

FIGHTING WORDS
Israel’s Shabbos Goy
Why America will come to regret the craven deal Obama is offering Netanyahu.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Nov. 15, 2010

Those of us who keep an eye on the parties of God are avid students of the weekly Sabbath sermons of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. In these and other venues, usually broadcast, this elderly Sephardic ayatollah provides an action-packed diet that seldom disappoints. A few months ago, he favored his devout audience with a classic rant in which he called down curses on the Palestinian Arabs and their leaders, wishing that a plague would come and sweep them all away. Last month, he announced that the sole reason for the existence of gentiles was to perform menial services for Jews: After that, he opined, their usefulness was at an end….

Read Clinton on Syria: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton give a speech during her visit to Government House in Melbourne on November 7. Syria has failed to meet Washington’s hopes since the Obama administration started to engage with the former US foe, Clinton said in an interview published Friday.… George Mitchell has engaged with Syria on the Middle East peace progress, and my Assistant Secretary Jeff Feltman has had good consultations with Syrian officials about Iraq,” she said. “But we have also had some very difficult discussions with Damascus about its actions in Lebanon and elsewhere,” the secretary said.

Clinton’s remarks on Friday. After Hassan Nasrallah said his group will “cut the hand” of anyone who tries to arrest its members for the 2005 assassination of Rafik Hariri….Clinton said: “Hezbollah should know that resorting once again to violence in Lebanon runs completely counter to the interests of the Lebanese people, the interests of the region, and of the United States … They should also know that if the goal of violence is to stop the tribunal, it won’t work …

Rafik Hariri murder probe hinders progress on Lebanon-Syria ties
Blandford in CSM

The Hariri murder probe is getting closer to issuing indictments, straining ties between Lebanon and Syria and complicating US goals in the region.

Last week, a senior UN official warned that Lebanon was in a “hyper-dangerous” situation.

Despite the focus on Hezbollah, Syria remains within the circle of suspicion for the murder of Hariri, as well as other prominent anti-Syrian figures, and would like to see an end to the tribunal, analysts say……

But there are signs recently that the US may be toughening its attitude toward Damascus.

“Rather than playing a positive role, recent Syrian behavior and rhetoric has had a destabilizing effect on Lebanon and the region, and has contributed to these recent tensions,” says Jake Walles, deputy assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs, citing the transfer of weapons from Syria to Hezbollah and the indictments against 33 Lebanese figures. “These types of activities directly undermine Lebanon’s sovereignty and directly undermine Syria’s stated commitments to Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence.”

Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, says that the US may adopt more of a balanced “hybrid policy” with Syria than outright engagement in the coming months.

“By now most policy makers expected there would be daylight between Syria and Hezbollah, but the arrest warrants forced everyone to go back to the drawing board,” he says.

Jerusalem Post: MI Chief: Iran and Russia giving Syria advanced weapons
2010-11-02, JPost

Outgoing Head of Military Intelligence General Amos Yadlin made his final appearance in front of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Tuesday, saying that he has seen “three defense ministers, two chiefs of the general staff and two …

“… In addition to supplying long range weapons such as M-600 and scuds missiles to Hezbollah, Syria was recently reported to have entered into a military alliance with Hezbollah, consisting of joint headquarters which would take hold in the event of war with Israel…..

While it remains a distinct possibility that Israel would attack Lebanese targets during a future conflagration with Hezbollah, it is doubtful that Israel would willingly extend the war to Syria. This remains the case even if Israel were to set itself an ambitious (and unrealistic) aim of eliminating Hezbollah. Israel would inevitably face condemnation from all corners of the international community; from allies and even the US, and would be hard pressed to find approval from Washington, keen to engage Syria and concerned about Syria’s ability to make life difficult for troops in neighboring Iraq. An Israeli attack and the lack of US support would make the likelihood of an emergency UN Security Council meeting and subsequent binding resolution a near guarantee, limiting Israel’s time and ability to launch a credible and effective operation against Syria. Indeed, expanding a war against Hezbollah would effectively assure Israel of international isolation. Following the US lead, Europe, Canada and Australia would outwardly condemn Israel’s actions in the harshest tone possible and would add fuel to the fire of the ‘boycott Israel’ movement. Much closer to home, Israel would face unrest not only in the Palestinian territories, but also in Arab neighborhoods in the north of Israel. Egypt, Jordan and Turkey would recall their ambassadors (assuming that Turkey’s ambassador will soon be re-stationed in Tel Aviv) and face virulent public demands that future relations with Israel be reassessed….

But assuming that, as Leiberman predicted, Israel did go to war against Syria, attacking Syrian targets, and destroying its airforce and the Assad regime, the question of Assad’s successor would become urgent. It is highly doubtful that Israel would want to open such a pandora’s box. Despite the rhetoric, posturing and concern over Syria’s ties to Iran and Hezbollah, Israel has enjoyed over two decades of relative quiet on its Syrian front…..

A future war between Israel and Hezbollah is unlikely to involve Syria, and if there were any kind of engagement it would be on a small scale, with Israel most likely attacking the transfer of balance-altering weaponry. If Israel were to attack Syria without a significant casus belli, it could face unprecedented diplomatic isolation as well as thousands of rockets aimed at its population centers and military targets. Assad, on the other hand, stands to lose his hold on power if he becomes embroiled in a large-scale conflict with Israel. Both parties have compelling reasons to want to avoid such an eventuality. There is no cause for complacency, however. In a border wherehedging trees can lead to a fatal exchange of fire, and Iranian nuclear ambitions could provoke an Israeli attack, unpredictability remains the best presumption.”

Syria: U.S. Can Keep it’s Diplomatic Advice
2010-11-04 AP. CBS News’ George Baghdadi in Damascus.

Syria on Thursday slammed advice given by a senior U.S. diplomat as to how the Middle Eastern nation should manage relations with its neighbors and internal political groups, …

Syria Must Wield Influence in Lebanon to Help U.S. Relations,
Says Top Diplomat, By Glenn Kessler, Nov. 1 (Washington Post)

Feltman discounted Iranian influence on Syria, saying that unless Damascus mends relations with Washington, it has no chance of winning the return of the Golan Heights, which was seized by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. Syria has said that it wishes to have its territorial expectations met through a peace agreement with Israel and that Syria recognizes the essential role that we can play in achieving that,” Feltman said. “So this suggests to me that Syria is in fact interested in a better relationship with us. But our interests in a comprehensive peace doesn’t mean that we are going to start trading our other interests in Iraq or Lebanon in order to get Damascus to like us better.”

But Feltman refrained from naming any consequences for Syria and Iran if they undermine the Lebanese government, except to say that Syria risked losing an opportunity to improve ties with Washington. … Feltman said that the administration is “deeply concerned” about Lebanon.

Haaretz: Outgoing MI chief hints at Israel role in strike on Syria nuclear facility
2010-11-02

Outgoing Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin took part Tuesday in his final meeting of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee meeting, ahead of his imminent departure from the post which he has held for the last four years. In his …

A century of dispute peaks in south Beirut
by Rami Khoury, The Daily Star – Opinion Articles -

Zvi Bar’el writes Thanks to our friend at War in Context:

“Iran is not the enemy, Israel is the enemy,” the head of the Center for Strategic Studies in Saudi Arabia declared in an interview with Al Jazeera. This was his response to a question on whether the $60 billion arms deal between Riyadh and Washington was meant to deter Iran. The American efforts to portray the deal as aimed against Tehran doesn’t fit with the Saudi point of view, and it seems this isn’t the only subject over which these two countries fail to see eye to eye.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia twice last week, and Iran reported that a senior Iranian official would visit Riyadh soon. It’s not clear if it will be Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki or the head of the National Security Council, Saeed Jalili.

But the frequent contacts between Iran and Saudi Arabia are not over the big arms deal or Iran’s nuclear plans. The two countries have concluded that they need to reach an agreement on two other issues regarding their sphere of influence in the region: Iraq and Lebanon.

Regarding Lebanon, Iran is trying to persuade Saudi Arabia to help stop the work of the special international tribunal investigating the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. This would prevent the collapse of the Lebanese regime. While Iran is worried about Hezbollah’s status, it also doesn’t want Lebanon to collapse or fall into another civil war, whose results cannot be ensured.

In this respect, Tehran doesn’t have to make too great an effort to get Riyadh’s support. This became clear last week to Jeffrey Feltman, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to Beirut, when he visited Riyadh. During his meeting with King Abdullah, the monarch tried to figure out America’s position if the international court’s work were stopped. Arab sources say Feltman was “furious but restrained,” and made it clear to the king that Washington was determined to support the tribunal.

With all due respect to the American insistence, if the client that is supposed to pay Washington $60 billion decides it’s vital to halt the tribunal’s work, it won’t make do with consulting the Americans. It will throw its full weight behind the efforts. Meanwhile, the indictment the tribunal is due to publish is not expected before February.

Syria’s Challenge: A Modern Secular Family Law,

By Elie Elhadj, for Syria Comment

Equality between women and men before the law is an inalienable human right–a natural justice. Gender equality is crucial for economic growth and human development.

Syria’s 2008 Gender Gap Index was a poor 107 out of 130 countries, scoring 0.618. It ranked in economic participation and opportunity; 107, educational attainment; 101, health and survival; 65, and political empowerment; 112. In 2007 (the first time Syria participated in the index) Syria ranked 103 out of 128 countries, scoring 0.6229 (Euromed Gender Equality Program report on Syria, p. 12, please see below).

Syria’s discriminatory laws against women should be abrogated. A modern secular personal status law for all Syrians should replace religious laws, including Shari’a laws and courts.

That a man can marry four wives, divorce any one of them without giving reason (with limited child custody rights, housing, or alimony); that a Muslim woman is prohibited from marrying a Christian or a Jewish man while the Muslim man is allowed to marry Christian and Jewish women; that a woman cannot pass her nationality on to her husband and children while the man can; that a woman must have a male family relative as guardian overseeing her actions; that “honor killing” of a woman by a male relative can effectively go unpunished; that Syria’s First Lady and the Republic’s Vice President are equal to one illiterate man in a Shari’a court of law in testimony, witness, or inheritance reflect the unsuitability of seventh century laws of the Arabian Desert to Syria’s way of life today.

Such anomalies are all the more serious in light of Syria’s government’s keen interest to project itself as a modern “secular” society. Further, such anomalies violate Syria’s constitution, which guarantees equality among citizens before the law in their rights and duties (see below).

All provisions in Syrian laws that infringe on the equality of women with men should be brought before Syria’s High Constitutional Court to be declared unconstitutional.

Such anomalies are also all the more surprising in light of the contradictions between Shari’a laws and the Prophetic Sunna, which tells us of the Prophet’s monogamous and exemplary treatment of His first wife of 25 years, Khadija.

Equality between women and men before the law is crucially important not only to accord natural justice and human rights to Syria’s women but also for economic and human developmental reasons. Treating women like chattel leaves its scars on women’s personality, defining their view of themselves as lesser beings and inhibiting their contribution to the country’s economic, scientific, artistic, and political developments.

Treating women like chattel causes women to demand large dowries in order to protect themselves from the vagaries of a Shari’a divorce system that would otherwise leave them practically destitute. Large dowries are responsible for delaying marriages for years among young men and women. Such a situation precipitates unhealthy social conditions that transcends all walks of life. A modern secular family law would reduce the risk of destitution from divorce and with it the size of dowries. As dowries size come down, marriage costs become affordable; solving a serious social problem for young men and women in Syria today.

In what follows, the findings of a 2010 report on Syria by the Euromed Gender Equality Program will be presented. The report elaborates upon the discriminatory practices women in Syria endure. Financed by the European Union Commission, the Euromed Gender Equality Program aims at enhancing equality between men and women in the Euromed Region.

Finally, a letter sent by Human Rights Watch to President Bashar AL-Asad in July 2009 will be presented. The letter summarizes the plight of Syrian women and seeks the President’s help to achieve gender equality.

The Euromed Gender Equality Program

In a study published in 2010 titled “National Situation Analysis Report. Women’s Human Rights and Gender Equality – Syria”, the Euromed Gender Equality Program addressed Syria’s discriminatory laws and practices against women. For the full report.

Equal constitutional rights for women and men

It is significant that Syrian women enjoy full constitutional rights, like men (Euromed Gender Equality Program report on Syria, p. 13):

Article 25: “Citizens are equal before the law in their rights and duties, and the government guarantees the principle of equal opportunities among citizens”.

Article 26: “Every Citizen has the right to contribute to the political, economic, social and cultural life”.

Article 27: “Citizens practice their rights and enjoy their freedoms”.

Article 45: “The State guarantees women all opportunities enabling them to fully and effectively participate in the political, social, cultural and economic life. The state removes the restrictions that prevent women’s development and participation in building the society”.

Discrimination against women in the Personal Status Act, the Nationality Act, and the Penal Code

However, notwithstanding their constitutional rights, provisions that discriminate against women exist in various laws relating to the family and women’s personal lives, such as the Personal Status Act, the Nationality Act, and the Penal Code (Ibid., pp. 14-18).

Family issues in Syria fall under the Personal Status Law of 1953, and its amendments of 1975. The law is applied to Syrians, except certain rules on issues related to Christians and each sect has its own religious rules regarding engagement, marriage, alimony, divorce and custody. The main articles that discriminate against women in Syria’s Personal Status Law are:

• Article 16 stipulates that the legal age of marriage is 18 for boys and 16 for girls with scope of judicial discretion for males of 15 years and females of 13 years if either the father or grandfather serving as wali consents and the parties appear physically able, and if he fears for the young girl’s “morals and reputation”;
• Matrimonial guardianship is mandatory for women only (Art. 21). Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslims, but Muslim men are allowed to marry non Muslims (Art. 48.2);
• Polygamy is permitted  up to 4 wives (Art. 17);
• Divorce: Art. 91 gives the right of repudiation to the husband (one-sided and unconditional); while according to Art. 105-115, the wife can petition for divorce under very restrictive conditions. The law makes no reference to providing habitation to the divorced mother and her children. Divorced women are often forced to return to their relatives houses with their children while their former husbands are allowed to stay in the marital house. Syrian women always feel threatened by divorce, as a husband can just dispense with her without giving compensation;
• Child custody is the prerogative of the father;
• Maintenance and obedience: according to Art. 74, the wife owes obedience to her husband in return for maintenance; and Art. 73 and 74 stipulate that the wife forfeits her maintenance rights if she works outside the home without her husband’s consent;
• Discrimination against women also relate to nationality. A woman cannot pass her nationality on to her husband. According to Article 3 of the Nationality Law, only Syrian fathers can pass their nationality on to their children and to their foreign wife.
• In terms of Penal Law, Article 548 states that men can be exempted from punishment if they kill or hurt their spouse, sister, or any of their female ascendants, whom they unexpectedly discover committing adultery or out-of-wed sexual relation with another person. Furthermore, the man is not deprived from inheriting from her. Article 548 was amended on 1st July 2009 by legislative decree No 37, 2009, raising the penalty for honor killing to least two years. According to Article 192, men who murder, beat or cause injury to their allegedly adulterous wives and sisters can claim extenuating circumstances before the law.

Further discrimination against women in the Syrian Penal Law relate to:

• Rape.  A rapist can be acquitted if he marries his victim. As such, the woman suffers three times. First, when she was raped, secondly when she is married to her rapist and thirdly when he inevitably divorces her after a few months.
• A murderer pays compensation (fedya) to the family of a female victim half what would be paid for a male victim.
• Adultery. According to Articles 473, 474 and 475, a woman who commits adultery is subject to punishment double that of the man’s, if she is not killed by her family. Men’s adultery is considered allowable when committed outside the martial house and is punished only when it occurs inside the home. Women, however, are punished for adultery no matter where it is committed. Under the law, male guardians are given the right to bring a suit of adultery against an unmarried woman, but they have no right to bring such a suit against an unmarried man.

International Agreements signed with Syrian reservations

The Syrian Commission for Family Affairs (SCFA) prepared three studies comparing the CEDAW articles and national legislation (personal status law, nationality code, and criminal code). In May 2006, it wrote a memorandum submitting it to the Cabinet with a request to remove all reservations on the CEDAW. In April 2007, the SCFA developed a draft for a presidential decree forwarding it to the Cabinet in order to be transferred officially to the parliament (Ibid.).

Syria ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) by Legislative Degree 330 dated 25/9/2002, with reservations believed to contradict Shari’a principles related to bestowing the nationality of mothers to their children; freedom of movement and housing; equality of rights and responsibilities linked to custody, kinship, maintenance and adoption, during and after marriage; legal effect of the children’s engagement or marriage; arbitration between countries to solve disputes (Ibid., p. 21).

Syria signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in 1990 and ratifying it in 1993, with a general reservation to any provisions that are not in conformity with Syrian legislation or the principles of Sharia, and particular reference to children’s freedom of religion, and adoption.

In 2007, a committee was set up to draft a new Personal Status Law. The draft proposal was presented in 2009. It received many critics.

Letter from Human Rights Watch to President Bashar Al-Asad

Human Rights Watch sent a letter on July 28, 2009 to President Bashar Al-Asad urging him to to enhance and protect the legal status of women consistent with Syria’s Constitution and international human rights standards.

July 28, 2009
President Bashar al-Assad
Presidential Palace, Damascus
Syrian Arab Republic

Your Excellency,

We are writing to express our support for your decision, as reported in the media, to set aside the draft personal status law, which would have continued the unequal treatment of Syrian women. The current draft would leave a number of problematic articles in the existing law intact, and would fail to enhance and protect the legal status of women.  We understand that the draft law has been returned to the Ministry of Justice, which we hope will create an inclusive process to revise the draft law so that it will be fair to all Syrians.

There is a growing trend in the Arab world to amend laws on the subject to ensure equal treatment for men and women. A few years ago Morocco amended its family code or mudawannah to grant equal rights to men and women in family matters.  Morocco, Egypt and Yemen have also recently granted women the right to pass on their nationality to their children. We hope that other countries in the region, including Syria, will soon follow suit.

We would like to share our concerns about some of the discriminatory provisions in the draft law and the supporting documentation in the hope that it will assist you in revising the law, consistent with Syria’s Constitution and international human rights standards. Article 25 of Syria’s Constitution states that “freedom is a sacred right and the state guarantees its citizens’ individual freedoms and protects their dignity and security. Article 25(3) further notes “the citizens are equal before the law in their rights and duties.”

Here are provisions that cause concern:

The draft law is discriminatory with regard to marriage age, allowing marriage for males at age 18 and females at 17 in one provision and boys at 15 and girls at 13 in another if they have reached puberty and have been granted permission by their guardians.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), ratified by Syria in 2003, states in article 16 (1) that state parties must take appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in all matters related to marriage and family relations.   The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which provides the guiding interpretation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, also ratified by Syria, has also addressed this issue. In its General Comment no. 4 (2003) the Committee expressed its concerns about early marriage and pregnancy, which it described as significant factors for problems related to sexual and reproductive health.  It states clearly that the Convention requires states to ensure the minimum age for marriage is the same for both girls and boys, and goes on to strongly recommend States Parties to increase the minimum age for marriage with and without parental consent to 18 years, for both girls and boys.

The draft law does not allow Syrian women married to non-citizens to pass on their nationality to their children, while it does not restrict men in this way.

Article 44 of Syria’s Constitution clearly states “The family is the basic unit of society and is protected by the state.”  By denying Syrian women the right to pass on their nationality to their children, the Syrian government denies equal protection to their families.

The draft law’s system of guardianship for women subjects female decision-making in family matters to male supervision. Specifically, article 20 requires adult women to receive consent from a male guardian to marry. In instances where a marriage has occurred without consent, article 27 stipulates that a woman’s male guardian may invalidate her marriage if her husband was found incompetent.

Article 15 of CEDAW specifically requires states to “accord to women, in civil matters, a legal capacity identical to that of men and the same opportunities to exercise that capacity.”  State parties are also required to ensure that all contracts with a legal effect directed at restricting the legal capacity of women will be voided.

Numerous articles in the draft law deny women autonomy and freedom of movement. These include provisions in article 37 (1) that state that women are not permitted to work outside the home without their husbands’ permission and that even a divorced woman can lose her alimony payment if she works without her former husband’s permission. Article 70 also denies women the right to travel outside Syria without permission.

Article 15(4) of CEDAW obliges states to grant women the same rights as men with regard to freedom of movement.  In addition, article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that “everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state” and that “everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”  Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)acceded to by Syria in 1969, requires all state parties to implement the right to freedom of movement both within a state and the right to enter and leave one’s own country.

The draft law also creates a discriminatory system for divorce. Under article 86, men have the right to divorce by simple repudiation while women must prove that there is a “valid” reason. In instances where a consensual decision has been reached by both spouses, the woman must repay her dowry to her husband.

Article 16 (c) of CEDAW says that state parties are responsible for guaranteeing “the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution.”   The ICCPR obliges states to “take appropriate steps to ensure equality of rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. In addition, as the body responsible for interpreting the ICCPR, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has noted that “any discriminatory treatment in regard to the grounds and procedures for separation or divorce, child custody, maintenance or alimony, visiting rights or the loss or recovery of parental authority must be prohibited.”

On another matter, we commend your efforts to reform article 548 of the penal code,  an important step to reform laws that effectively grant immunity to men who murder their female relatives.  However, we remain concerned about other provisions in the law that urgently need changing to address adequately the issue of so-called honour crimes and to protect women and girls from violence.

Article 548 of the penal code still provides a 2-year minimum sentence for killing a female relative on the basis of honour. Articles 548, 239, 240, 241 and 242 grant immunity or a reduced sentence to a man who murders his female relative.  In addition, Article 192 states that if the criminal act was based on an honourable intent, then the judge has a number of options to reduce the sentence, including short-term detention or imprisonment.

Violence, of any kind, against women has long been considered a human rights violation that all states have a responsibility to eradicate.  The United Nations General Assembly resolution 61/143 on the Intensification of efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women notes that states need to condemn such violence and to “refrain from invoking any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination as set out in the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women.”

We ask your government to abolish all articles that reduce sentences for “honourable intent” and that effectively grant reduced sentences for crimes provoked by passion.  We also ask your government to amend the unequal treatment of women under these provisions in the penal law and to consider all cases of murder as such.

We urge you to ensure the revision of the above – mentioned articles in Syria’s Personal Status Law. We also urge you to withdraw Syria’s reservations to articles 9(2) and 16 (1) (C) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women concerning equal rights between men and women to pass on their nationality to their children and the equal rights and responsibilities of men and women during marriage and its dissolution.

Finally, we recommend the Ministry of Justice grant the Syrian Commission for Family Affairs (SCFA) the responsibility for redrafting this law, under its mandate, issued by presidential decree in 2003.  We ask that this process be open and transparent, with consideration given to the knowledge and perspectives of all parties who offer their views and the full participation of civil society organizations, including women’s rights organizations and legal experts.

Personal status laws affect the lives of ordinary men and women, and as such they should treat both equally, and in particular should enhance, not reduce, women’s rights.  Lessening the inequality that women face in their families will ultimately assist women to advance in Syrian society.  We welcome the opportunity to discuss these matters further and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Liesl Gerntholtz

Executive Director of the Women’s Rights Division
Human Rights Watch
CC:      Ministry of Justice
Prime Minister of Syria