In U.S., Calls Grow for Direct Contact With Syria

As international leaders search for a negotiated end to the violence in Lebanon, there is little doubt that the go-to state is Syria, Hezbollah’s powerful ally and perhaps the only Arab state capable of guaranteeing a lasting peace.

But who will go?

The Bush administration’s policy of isolating the government of Bashar Assad has left Washington with no high-level contacts in Syria. With no U.S. ambassador in Damascus, a strong system of economic sanctions in place and a refusal to talk with Syrian leaders, Washington is negotiating the most serious Middle East crisis in years through Arab and European intermediaries whose influence is questionable.

The policy has frustrated some U.S. diplomats and prompted a growing chorus in Washington to call for direct contacts not only with Syria, but also possibly with its ally, Iran -- the two biggest backers of militant anti-Israel groups in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

Without Assad’s intervention, no agreement to end Hezbollah rocket attacks or to safely place a new peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon is possible, say those who advocate opening new lines of communication.

By contrast, an order from Syria to halt weapons and other logistical shipments at the Lebanon border could strangle Hezbollah military operations within weeks, military analysts say.

“Of course Syria has the power to make Hezbollah stop fighting. Because while Hezbollah is to a certain degree independent, it needs a political umbrella, and Syria and Iran are that umbrella,” said Redwan Ziadeh, a political analyst based in Damascus, the Syrian capital.

In 1998, when Hezbollah was firing rockets into Israel, President Clinton telephoned Syrian President Hafez Assad “to stop Hezbollah, to stop the rockets. And Hezbollah stopped the rockets,” Ziadeh said.

In Washington on Friday, Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska became the latest prominent foreign policy expert to call for contacts with Syria.

“America’s approach to Syria and Iran is inextricably tied to Middle East peace,” Hagel said in a speech to the Brookings Institution. “Whether or not they were directly involved in the latest Hezbollah and Hamas aggression in Israel, both countries exert influence in the region in ways that undermine stability and security.

“Both Damascus and Tehran must hear from America directly,” he said.

Former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and Leslie H. Gelb, the president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, have made similar recent public statements.

Within the Bush administration, the prevailing view is that Assad has made a strategic decision to ally his nation with Iran and Hezbollah against the United States, and that trying to detach Syria from those alliances would be fruitless, said administration sources speaking on condition of anonymity.

Still, Bush appeared Friday to be avoiding any repeat of his earlier criticisms of Damascus. When asked what message he had for Syria and Iran during a news conference with visiting British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the president passed up a chance to bash the Syrians, instead offering what seemed to be an invitation to get involved.

Blair, answering the same question, went further, saying Syria and Iran faced a choice, either to risk increasing confrontation or to “come in and participate as proper and responsible members of the international community.”

So far, the United States has relied on Arab allies such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt to try to reach out to Syria.

But with Arab public opinion mounting in favor of Hezbollah and Syria’s support for the group, those governments have had trouble making a convincing case.

Thousands have turned out for anti-Israel rallies across the Arab world. Here in Damascus, posters of Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah hang in shop windows, and Hezbollah flags flutter out of car windows. The rising public support for the first time seems to cross traditional religious and political boundaries, encompassing Sunni and Shiite Muslims and secular Arabs.

Thus, moderate Arab leaders have begun distancing themselves from Washington.

Saudi Arabia, for one, was stung that a statement it issued early in the crisis criticizing Hezbollah for starting the fighting was used as partial justification for Israel’s bombardment. This week, the kingdom adopted a much different tone, with King Abdullah warning that “should the option of peace fail as a result of the Israeli arrogance, only the option of war will remain.”

Syrians say that they have little opportunity to act diplomatically while Israel continues to bomb Lebanon.

“The minute the Israelis decide to stop ruining Lebanon, Syria can play a mediating role. But nobody can stick their neck out in such a crisis so long as the Israelis are being so warlike,” said Sami Moubayed, a Syrian writer and political commentator.

Syrian officials said this week that they were ready to open direct talks with the U.S., but they appeared to be uncertain of what Washington expected from the relationship -- or what it was prepared to deliver in exchange.

“Of course, the Americans always want something from Syria: Sealing the border with Iraq. Closing the offices of the Palestinian groups. Cooling relations with Iran. The problem is they want so many things, but they offer nothing in return,” said Nabil Samman, a Damascus-based analyst.

Analysts and officials in Damascus said Syria would not initiate negotiations to end the fighting in Lebanon unless the talks included an opportunity for a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the fate of the Golan Heights -- territory Israel captured from Syria in 1967.

Assad also expects guarantees of a continued role for Syria in Lebanon and assurances that Lebanon will not be used as a platform to undermine his regime, they said.

The fact that Hezbollah has not fired long-range rockets as far as Tel Aviv is evidence that Syria has placed the group on a leash, many analysts here said. But Damascus’ desire to avoid war with Israel is a more likely reason for the move than any indirect lobbying by the United States.

In a telephone interview Friday, Syria’s ambassador to the United States, Imad Moustapha, said there had been “absolutely no contact” between Syria and the United States since the crisis began. The caustic tone of his remarks indicated he expected no opening anytime soon.

“How does he envision this participation?” Moustapha asked, referring to Bush and his news conference comment. “This administration doesn’t talk to anyone who doesn’t support its policies. He thinks things work by dictation, not diplomacy: ‘Syria must do this, Syria must to that.’ ”

Bush “always talks past countries, not to them,” Moustapha said.

Moustapha dismissed any possibility that Bush’s remarks could be interpreted as an invitation to a diplomatic opening.

“You don’t talk to countries via news conferences,” he said.

*

Murphy reported from Damascus and Marshall from Washington. Times staff writer Doyle McManus in Washington contributed to this report.