U-Turn in US Policies in West Asia?

Soon after the military strikes on Syria was forestalled, negotiations between the US and Iran have started. Has the US really changed course in West Asia or is it only a temporary tactical shift with goals of regime change in both Syria and Iran still remaining constant?

The key issue here is not whether the military-industrial (and now security complex) has changed its objective in West Asia but what is it that the American people is willing accept. First, the British Parliament threw cold water on Cameron's war plans. Even though the US media marched to Obama's drum beats of war, it was becoming clear that the American people did not want the US to get entangled in a war in Syria. With the Russian move of seizing on Kerry's rhetorical statement that Syria could avert military strikes if it dismantled its chemical arsenal, the US could declare partial victory and then sit down to serious negotiations. The Security Council resolution that has now been passed is not under Chapter VII and a separate UN Resolution would be required if the US wants to attack Syria; of course if it wants to operate within the UN framework.

Image Courtesy: flickr.com

With a momentum against war having been created with the Syrian agreement, the US finally agreed to do what Iran had always been asking – sit down and discuss what measures Iran needs to take that would satisfy the US and its allies that it was not building a nuclear bomb. Iran had always made it clear that they would not give up their right to the nuclear fuel cycle but had no intention of building nuclear weapons. The US – and Israel – identified the fuel cycle with nuclear weapons and wanted Iran to give this up; even though it is Iran's right under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. The US and Iran have already had one round of talks – Kerry and Zarif, the Iranian Foreign Minister met at the sidelines of the UN. The US and Iranian President have spoken, though only on phone, making the ratcheting up war right now difficult.

Iran is clear that any ceiling – either on quantity of material being processed or the degree of enrichment above 3.5% – will depend on the lifting of sanctions. Contrary to the claims made by western media that sanctions have pushed Iran to the negotiating table, it is clear that it is the US that was unwilling to enter into any serious dialogue and wanted instead a regime change. The US now seems to have reconciled itself of not having regime change as an immediate strategy, be it in Syria or in Iran. That does not mean that regime change in either Iran or Syria have been abandoned as an objective, merely that it is not longer an immediate one.

The countries that have been affected by this sudden turn in US policies are Israel and the Gulf monarchies. They had both gambled on the US doing the job of humbling Assad, if not removing him and weakening the Hezbollah-Syria-Iran line-up. In this, they have failed. The Syrian opposition has fractured badly. Two al-Qaeda fronts – ISIS and al Nusra – have emerged as the main opponents of the Assad regime, with the western backed opposition of Free Syrian Army and Syrian National Council as a distant third. Both ISIS and al Nusra have access to advanced weaponry and are well financed, indicating that they are receiving support from the Gulf monarchies. Libya is an immediate source of arms, with al Qaeda affiliates being very much on the ascendency there. But the kind of arms indicate that other sources including the CIA are also active. It is either western-backed groups going over the al Qaeda affiliates with US supplied arms or the US playing a cynical game – supporting al Qaeda to destabilise Assad.

Turkey's role is also suspect. The Rehaynali bombing in Turkey was attributed by the Erdogan regime to Assad's forces. ISIS has recently claimed that it was the perpetrator and threatened Turkey with more such attacks if it does not get a free hand in the Syrian Turkish border. It has also taken over the border town of Azaz from other Syrian opposition groups. Turkey will now have to either openly align with al Qaeda or earn its wrath if it closes the Turkish border with Azaz.

Over all, the Hezbollah-Syria-Iran axis have emerged stronger out of the current crisis. But this should not cloud the larger picture. Syria is still in the midst of brutal civil war, with large parts of its territory in the hands of the two al Qaeda affiliates. With the opposition having turned down the possibility of talks with the Assad government, the war will continue. Lebanon is being drawn into this war, with Saudis, Israelis and the US all fomenting sectarian forces there. The larger game-plan of egging on the Sunnis against the Shi'ites continue in West Asia – the familiar duplicitous imperial game of of divide and rule.

In Syria, the chemical weapons being dismantled within one year in the midst of an on-going civil war seems a herculean task. It may be noted that the US and Russians had 10 years – from 1997 to 2007 – to dismantle their chemical arsenal. They did not manage to do this and asked for another 5 years grace. Even this grace period has run out in 2012, with dismantling of their chemical weapons still not taking place and no new date being announced. It is not entirely bad faith but the difficulty and costs of dismantling chemical weapons that is also holding up their meeting the treaty obligations.

The UN inspectors have entered Syria to continue their investigations on various allegations of chemical attack. It remains to be seen how their investigations uncovers the truth and identifies which side is using chemical weapons in Syria.

Meanwhile, Israel's chemical arsenal as well as its nuclear weapons have come back into international discourse. Israel has an undisclosed chemical arsenal as well as possibly 200 nuclear war heads. It is becoming increasingly difficult for the west to argue that Israel needs its nuclear weapons while all others in the region should give up even nuclear capability. It remains to be seen how long the US and its allies can stone-wall demands for Middle East being a nuclear weapons free zone. Or for that matters global nuclear disarmament.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author's personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Newsclick