UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Military


Office of Research Issue Focus Foreign Media Reaction

March 23, 2000


CLINTON-ASSAD SUMMIT 'AN OPPORTUNITY NOT TO BE MISSED'



While noting the White House's caution against over-optimism, foreign commentators nevertheless judged that this Sunday's summit meeting between President Clinton and Syrian President Hafez al-Assad in Geneva has raised "worldwide expectations" that peace talks between Israel and Syria may resume soon. Many determined that the summit will seal a "package deal" that has already been reached in "secret talks...between Washington, Damascus and Jerusalem," and that Mr. Clinton "is expected to receive Mr. Assad's guarantees on issues such as normalization, security and water" in exchange for "guarantees...on Israel's decision to withdraw from the Golan."


Israeli and Syrian commentators, while noting that the summit presents an "historic opportunity" for peace, generally adopted a more cautious, wait-and-see attitude. Syria's government-run press remained faithful to its sacred text that Israel's commitment to "a complete withdrawal to June 4, 1967 borders" is a prerequisite for the resumption of talks. Israel's press insisted that peace with Syria is unthinkable unless there is a "sea-change" in Syria's outlook, including Mr. Assad's willingness to meet Israeli Prime Minister Barak "face-to-face." "Clinton's objective...should be to...impress upon the Syrian leader that the U.S. shares Israel's unwillingness to be satisfied by a narrow, tactical, begrudging peace that is practically indistinguishable from the current state of non-war," the independent Jerusalem Post held. Commentators elsewhere in the Middle East, and especially in Europe, stressed the "urgency" of closing "the Syrian file," given the anticipated change in Syria's leadership in the near future. Further, they noted, with both Mr. Barak and Palestinian leader Arafat also being driven by "domestic deadlines," this may be "the last chance for years'' to save the faltering Middle East peace process. These were highlights:


ASSAD FACTOR: Israeli, Kuwaiti and British papers advised Mr. Assad "to act urgently" and to "avoid inflammatory" moves. "Both are necessary to allow Mr. Barak to concede more territory," London's conservative Times held. Arab and Israeli writers alike also saw Mr. Assad as having "an historic opportunity to strengthen Syria's ties with the United States" if he breaks with "the sloganeering" of yesteryear. Noting that Syria recently formed a new cabinet and is showing "more interest in economic and political advancement than in confrontation," Kuwait's independent Al-Seyassah maintained, "Assad knows he will be playing a losing game if Syria approaches its meetings with the U.S. in the intransigent fashion of the past."


U.S. ROLE: Arab commentators asked Washington to refrain from showing any "leniency with Israel." But while the U.S. was portrayed as being "the only power who can put pressure on Israel," the majority in the Arab press judged that any failure to move precipitously toward peace "should be shouldered by Israel." In terms of President Clinton's own "intensive efforts to salvage the peace process," Syrian papers applauded his "determination," but others--in Saudi Arabia and Italy--deemed that the president was motivated mostly by the desire "to bring prestige to his presidency."

EDITOR: Gail Hamer Burke


EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 37 reports from 14 countries, March 20-23. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.


MIDDLE EAST


SYRIA: "Demarcation Of June 4 Line"


An editorial in government-owned Tishreen (3/23) read: "When Syria entered the two recent rounds of talks in Washington and Virginia, it did this with the goal of restoring all of its occupied lands.... It certainly did not go to the talks to discuss the guarantees and normalization of relations Israel wanted. Syria announced its readiness to respond to the requirements of peace in case the Israeli forces withdraw fully to behind June 4, 1967 line.... But the Israelis, as usual, put the cart before the horse.... A matter that forced Syria freeze the talks until the announcement of a firm Israeli position to fully withdraw to June 4 line. The question: Does President Clinton carry with him this pledge especially when Barak has admitted publicly in the Kennest the existence of Rabin's deposit? This question is legitimate since Syria will not be indulged in new talks based on vague Israeli intentions. Syria will not be involved in peace talks on the basis of vague promises or unclear pledges. It is important that the rulers Tel Aviv be firmly committed to demarcation of June 4 line and withdrawal of their forces from all of the Golan.. The realization of peace is subject, first and foremost, to a radical change in the Israeli position. A change that is difficult to achieve without a firm American stand based on facts of peace, its requirements and the importance it represents to America and the world."


"The Pros And Cons Of The Geneva Summit"


Dr. Turki Saqr, chief editor of government-owned Al-Ba'th, held (3/23): "If Barak is placing his bet on the fact that Syria will give more than what it has already given during the first Geneva summit (in 1994,) then he has a losing bet, and his calculations could not be more erroneous if thought that Syria would retract an inch from its previous position with regard a complete Israeli withdrawal to June 4, 1967 borders. Furthermore, the Israeli commitment to demarcate the borders of June 4 is the only way to resume the negotiations on the Syrian-Israeli track. Syria highly appreciates President Clinton's intensive efforts to salvage the peace process, whenever the Israeli government obstructed it or tried to kill it off. Syria also values the determination of President Clinton to hold the current Geneva summit and wishes that it will produce fruitful results. If it was not for that, Syria would not have come to Geneva with an open mind and a positive attitude to avail a new and very precious opportunity for the peace process to resume.... If this opportunity is lost, then the responsibility would not be Syria's or President Clinton's, rather it will be shouldered by the Israeli side."


"The Upcoming Meeting"


Government-owned Tishreen held (3/22): "International commentators expressing optimism on achieving positive results during the Geneva summit between presidents Assad and Clinton. Caution is the order of the day in the region due to Syria's previous experience with the Israelis at the peace talks that took place in Washington and Virginia.... President Clinton is really interested in making the peace process a success, but experience has shown that the U.S. administration is not willing to exert any pressure on Israel to make her succumb to the requirements of peace. It only expressed its hopes to the Israeli leaders who in turn bargained with the peace process and accordingly received huge amounts of U.S. aid.... Syria has had a bitter experience with the Barak government in Shepherdstown.... Israeli leaders cannot be trusted.... Syria has to deal with them cautiously.... Syria is open to any sincere effort to boost the peace process.... It hopes that President Clinton will bring an Israeli commitment to withdraw to the June 4th line and positive proposals based on the Security Council resolutions."



"The Geneva Summit"


Fouad Mardoud, chief editor of the government-owned Syria Times, wrote (3/22): "What Syria expects to hear in the Geneva summit is the magic word: Withdrawal to the June 4th line. This would automatically mean a commitment to the main prerequisites of peace by Israel. The summit will be important and constructive for the peace process if it can help resume the peace talks on the bases of the Madrid conference, and if it facilitates discussing the same issue on which the Israeli government had not taken a stance during the Shepherdstown talks."


"Worldwide Expectations For Geneva Summit"


An editorial in government-owned Al-Ba'th (3/22) read: "President Assad will carry to the Geneva summit Syria and Lebanon's concern about reaching a just and comprehensive peace.... He will speak on behalf of all Arabs. He will give Israel a new chance to make peace. It might be the last chance."


"The Real Breakthrough"


Fouad Mardoud, chief editor of the government-owned Syria Times, commented (3/21): "In President Clinton's judgment, an agreement to resume the peace talks on the Syrian track is a breakthrough. That sanguine assessment will be tested during the next few weeks when the United States sums up the positions of Israel on substantial matters like withdrawal from the occupied territories, water sharing, security arrangements and demarcation of the June 4th line.... The United States has now all the means and tools to change persuade Israel's government that it can no longer defy the UN resolutions and the international will to see a more secure and peaceful Middle East.... That will not come of course without a real shift in Israel's policy towards the substantial issues of the peace negotiations. Therefore, President Clinton's judgment on the resumption of the peace talks as a real breakthrough may need the sweat of Washington poured into the current efforts if the progress is to be seen substantial, not only procedural."


ISRAEL: "Assad's Day"


Mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot opined (3/23): "Next Sunday, the president of the world's greatest democracy and the ruler of one the world's last dictatorships are going to meet in Geneva to discuss an Israeli-Syrian peace arrangement. Breaking with tradition, it is the Americans who are this time exuding optimism while the Israelis are far more skeptical. The Israeli position is quite understandable. As long as the Syrians stick to their 'all or nothing' line, there can be no progress whatsoever. If the Syrians decide to revise their position, as Prime Minister Barak hopes, Israel is going to move into a wholly new and historic situation. This may or may not happen. If it does not, we'll wait for the next chance."


"It's Assad's Turn To Give"


Dan Margalit wrote in independent Haaretz (3/23): "Prime Minister Barak has gone further than any of his predecessors in his willingness to take risks for the sake of peace.... Clinton has accepted Israel's position and he will tell Assad that he must choose between leading his country to a brighter future or remaining in the stagnant present.... Assad knows that if he wants to avoid a clash with Clinton he must come up with clear answers to a number of tough questions.... Assad has an historic opportunity to strengthen Syria's ties with the United States, if he only agrees to the demilitarization of the Golan Heights; to a thinning-out of Syrian forces deployed in the area stretching between the border with Israel and Damascus; to an early-warning station on Mount Hermon for a minimum period of 10 years; and to a normalization of ties with Israel."



"Clinton's Syrian Card"


Nationalist Hatzofe held (3/23): "The cat is slowly coming out of the bag. President Clinton's supposedly surprising announcement of his upcoming meeting with the Syrian president is shedding a little light on the secret talks that have been taking place recently between Washington, Damascus and Jerusalem.... Clinton obtained Israel's agreement in principle to a withdrawal to behind the international line in the Golan Heights. The only open question is Syria's access to the Sea of Galilee.... Barak keeps his cards close to his chest, waiting for the outcome of the Geneva meeting. In the meantime, however, he is preparing for the day when he will have to ask the Knesset and the people to approve an agreement with the Syrians. This explains his recent messages to his coalition partners to get ready to support the government's withdrawal policies.... In fact, Barak's coalition partners...hold the key to an agreement with Syria. As long as Barak has not secured their support he is unable to shift his contacts with the United States and Syria into high gear."


"U.S. Aid For Syria Peace Deal Won't Be Easy To Get"


Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in the lead story of independent Ha'aretz (3/22): "The consensus of senior members of Congress, U.S. Jewish leaders and Washington lobbyists is that difficulties can be expected in approving any large aid package requested to support the peace process between Israel and Syria. Jerusalem has learned that there is strong congressional opposition to giving military aid to Syria and to sending U.S. troops to the Golan Heights, as well as some opposition to economic aid for Syria. Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem say that the Syrian regime has a particularly negative image on Capitol Hill, and the anti-Semitic articles in the Damascus daily Tishrin a few weeks ago only strengthened this impression. The reports also claim that Israel will have an uphill battle to get economic aid after a withdrawal from the Golan, as well as the $17 billion military aid package it has requested. In light of the pessimism, Prime Minister Barak has decided not to submit a civilian aid request yet to subsidize the resettlement of Golan residents.... The Israeli embassy in Washington is reporting that numerous Washington players--among them, Henry Kissinger--are advising Israel to wait for Syrian President Hafez Assad's son, Bashar, to succeed him, and not to arrive at any deal with the ailing president.... Finally, the struggle between the Republican majority in Congress and the Clinton administration in an election year does not augur well for more foreign aid."


"Assad's Last Chance"


Independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (3/22): "It should not take a meeting with U.S. President Bill Clinton to convey the message, but the meeting in Geneva next Sunday is Syrian President Hafez Assad's last chance. Prime Minister Ehud Barak may still be pressing for an agreement, but there are signs that support for such a deal among the Israeli public is waning. The Clinton-Assad summit comes at a time when Barak is almost alone in his cabinet in seeming to prefer the Syrian track over pursuit of a final-status agreement with the Palestinians.... For a start, Clinton must convince Assad that the attempt to continue the process without a face-to-face meeting between him and Barak will be fruitless.... The latest reports of Assad's failing health only increase the need to establish that peace is not a momentary declaration made to retrieve territory, but sea change that Syria will help lead throughout the Arab world. Clinton's objective in his meeting with Assad should be to...impress upon the Syrian leader that the United States shares Israel's unwillingness to be satisfied by a narrow, tactical, begrudging peace that is practically indistinguishable from the current state of non-war."


"Now Or Never"


Washington correspondent Nitzan Horowitz wrote in independent Ha'aretz (3/21): "It is clear to

the U.S. government's Middle East peace team that it is a case of 'now or never' when it comes to renewing the talks with Syria and quickly achieving an agreement. The date for the withdrawal from Lebanon is drawing closer, the U.S. president's schedule is packed, the Israeli government's situation is troubled, and Assad's health is failing. A renewal of talks was thus decided upon even before the details for next week's Geneva summit were finalized. The aim is to achieve results as quickly as possible, with the American script reading thus: The negotiations will start a short while after the Geneva summit, possibly next week; the talks will end after a month to six weeks; Barak, Assad and Clinton will sign the pact together. Clinton is a political magician. He has successfully turned his image around in recent months, never once allowing his political potions to spill. The State Department, National Security Council and Washington think-tanks all firmly believe that the time is right, that the president has the opportunity to close the Syrian file. Otherwise, this will be noted as the biggest missed opportunity in history, with the danger that the chance will never come around again. What will happen now? Dennis Ross said it best: 'It's very simple. We'll find out in a few months.'"


LEBANON: "A Package Deal"


Nasir Al-Asad maintained in opposition, Hariri-owned Al-Mustaqbal (3/23): "The Geneva summit means that a decision has been taken on the issue of June 4th.... But June 4th is not the only issue; it is believed that a 'package deal' was reached and lead to the Clinton-Assad summit.... A source believes that the solution started to crystallize when Barak acknowledged Rabin's promise.... Barak linked this acknowledgment to water, security and normalization of relations. This meant that he wanted a package deal.... The United States was quick to deal with this progress by keeping in contact with both parties and helping them advance one step after another."


"The Summit On Syrian-American Relations"


Sami Clip observed in leftist, pro-Syria As-Safir (3/23): "A Western source believes that before the Geneva summit was announced, President Assad succeeded in conveying his great dissatisfaction with the U.S. performance in Shepherdstown, particularly the American leniency with Israel. As is known, Washington had already promised Assad that there would be full withdrawal from the Golan. It also promised to uphold the secrecy of negotiations.... Now, it is believed that differences over a lot of issues have been resolved.... The Geneva summit could be considered a summit of reconciliation between Assad and Clinton.... Assad, however, still feels that the United States is not totally convinced of the principle of a just peace.... Assad will not hesitate to stop negotiations if he feels that Barak resumed his maneuvers again."


"A Summit To Exchange Guarantees Between Syria And Israel"


An editorial by Patrick Seale in pan-Arab Al-Hayat said (3/21): "News about a Clinton-Assad summit means that peace is looming on the horizon.... Clinton is expected to carry to Assad several specific confirmations about a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan. Assad is also expected to carry clear answers on the water, security and normalization of relations issues.... If the summit succeeds, diplomatic sources expect a resumption of negotiations within days. They also expect to reach agreements on both the Syrian and Lebanese tracks within two months.... There is no doubt that such a quick and tangible progress could be characterized as a personal victory for President Clinton."


"Lebanon, The Sensitive Issue"


An editorial by Rosana Bu Munsif in moderate An-Nahar said (3/21): "This summit is not only

important because it will re-launch the Syrian-Israeli negotiations.... It is important because of the domestic developments in Syria in light of Assad's preparations for his succession by his son Bachar.... It is also important because of the sensitivity of the Lebanese track in light of the American resentment of several positions taken by Lebanese officials lately."


"Everybody Realizes Where The Gaps Are, Clinton Has An Effective Role To Play"


An editorial by Rafiq Khuri in centrist Al-Anwar held (3/21): "President Clinton is using his last weapon to revive the peace process.... As usual in diplomatic games, President Clinton is trying to reduce expectations, at the same time, lift the level of efforts.... The region is revolving around two impressions: The first is the feeling that peace negotiations have reached a really high level and approached the final stages.... The second is the feeling that issues are two complicated and need more efforts.... Everybody realizes where the gaps are.... This is where President Clinton has to play an effective role."


EGYPT: "Hope That Talks Will Resume On The Bases Of Madrid Conference"


Pro-government Al Ahram remarked (3/22): "President Clinton surprised the world by announcing in Bangladesh that he will meet with President Assad in Geneva on Sunday. Although Clinton has warned repeatedly against over optimism, the resumption of the Syrian-Israeli talks must be the aim of this summit. As Samuel Berger said, there is no specific American plan for the resumption of talks on the Syrian track to be proposed. That is why Clinton was cautious. However, Berger did not deny American proposals on the resumption of these talks. Assad and Clinton will not venture a summit unless differences between Syria and Israel, especially on the 1967 borders, have been bridged.... There are hopes that the summit will result in Syrian-Israeli talks resuming on the bases of the Madrid conference.... Hopefully, it will also be part of a more comprehensive diplomatic effort to activate the peace process on all peace tracks."


JORDAN: "Meeting Confirms That Playing The Tracks Game Does Not Work"


Daily columnist Mohammad Naji Amayreh wrote in semi-official Al-Ra'i (3/22): "It is likely that the American-Syrian summit may achieve a quick breakthrough not only in bilateral relations, but also in the resumption of Syria's negotiations with Israel. It may also confirm that immobility on one track does not necessarily mean the halt of all other tracks."


"Syria Does Not Need A Fig Leaf"


Leading columnist Uraib Al-Rantawi commented in center-left, influential Al-Dustour (3/22): "Many commentators are treating the announcement of the Geneva summit as a sin committed, or about to be committed by Syria. The shock that these people feel as a result of the revival of Syrian-Israeli track shows only that their minds and analyses are in the grip of ideological illusions that are devoid of any awareness of political reality. Syria has always stated that it was in favor of peace. Today it does nothing that it had not announced its intention to do a long time ago.... Why portray Syria as being forced into this situation? What Syria does is not a sin that needs to be covered with a fig leaf. It is exactly what Cairo and Amman and Gaza have done before, and exactly what Beirut will do later. The rest is nothing but empty talk."


ALGERIA: "What's Expected"


Independent, French-language Le Jeune Independent noted (3/22): "Clinton is expected to transmit Barak's guarantees to Assad on Israel's decision to withdraw from the Golan. Clinton


is expected to receive Assad's guarantees on issues such as normalization, security and water. Some sources expect an agreement to be signed within two months."


KUWAIT: "Peace Process Reflects U.S.' Continuing Global Domination"


Independent Al-Qabas ran this piece by Hassan Al-Musawi (3/20): "Depending on the United States only stresses U.S. Secretary of State Albright's belief that America will remain the sole sponsor for the Israeli-Syrian peace talks. Albright's belief indicates that America wants to be exclusive in the region to practice full domination with Israel. The New World system led by the United States has an economic target which is to obtain commodities available in the region, and is aimed at continuing global control."

"Assad Must Loose His Past Intransigence In Approaching The Americans"


Independent Al-Seyassah carried this report by Ahmad Al-Aarallah (3/22): "President Assad is well aware that the sloganeering that has characterized Syrian dialogue with the Americans so far has hurt rather than helped the Syrian cause. A Syria on good terms with the United States is vital to stability in the Middle East. This wonderful opportunity to move the peace process forward will be wasted if President Assad dusts off the old rhetoric for the trip to Geneva. Going down that avenue will lead only to further isolation. Forming a new cabinet is a step in the right direction and is a clear indication that Syria is now more interested in economic and political advancement than in confrontation. President Assad knows he will be playing a losing game if Syria approaches their meetings with the United States in the intransigent fashion of the past. No one doubts the purity of Syria's intentions or their desire to achieve peace in the Middle East."


SAUDI ARABIA: "The Importance Of The U.S. Role"


Makkah-based, conservative Al-Nadwa's editorial judged (3/22): "Nobody can deny the importance of the role of the United States in the peace process, because it is the only power which can put pressure on Israel.... The upcoming meeting between Presidents Clinton and Al-Assad...provides a new momentum to efforts to revitalize peace negotiations...stalled for months due to a lack of an active and serious Israeli desire for peace.... The Clinton-Al-Assad meeting will not be an easy one, but it will be very important.... We ask President Clinton to put an end to Israeli delays and to draw red lines that must not be crossed."


"Clinton-Assad Summit.... Is There Any Realistic Solution?"


Riyadh-based, conservative Al-Riyadh editorialized (3/21): "President Clinton has not made a firm promise to resolve the conflict between Damascus and Tel Aviv. But he understands that, without reaching a peace agreement with Syria, key Arab doors will remain closed to Israel.... Clinton knows the demands of Al-Assad are realistic and reasonable, but if Israel seeks to unilaterally impose its will...(then) the Geneva meeting will be just a diplomatic dialogue that lacks serious work which would provide all with a just peace. There is a fear of the collapse of this summit, if it does not meet the minimum reasonable demands of Syria."


"Nobel Prize Aspirations?"


Jeddah-based, conservative Al-Madina opined (3/21): "The U.S. president wants to utilize the remaining few months of his presidency to accomplish a task which will allow him to record his name as a key peacemaker in the twentieth century, or perhaps he aspires to win the first Noble Peace Prize in the new millennium."





UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: "A Simple Handshake Won't Break An Impasse"


The Sharjah-based, English-language Gulf Today editorialized (3/21): "U.S. President Bill Clinton appears to give a boost to the flagging Middle East peace negotiations by announcing a meeting with Syrian President Hafez Assad in Geneva before the end of this month.... However, it is abundantly clear that a simple meeting and handshake between Clinton and Assad...is not going to break the impasse. Nor will U.S. promises, including pledges to remove legislative impediments for better ties between Washington and Damascus, do the trick. The imperative in the situation is clear: Syria would not settle for anything less than a honorable restoration of its legitimate territorial rights in return for peace with Israel and whatever that entails."


"Arab-Zionist Conflict Enters A Decisive New Phase"


Dubai-based, business-oriented Al-Bayan held (3/21): "With President Clinton's announcement of his summit with Syrian President Hafez Assad in Geneva next Sunday, the settlement of the Arab-Zionist conflict enters a decisive new phase with huge implications for the future of the region.... From the Syrian point of view, this summit represents the objective alternative to all Israel's calls for high-level contacts with Syria. Whereas the latter used to link any such contacts to progress in the peace process as a whole, this [direct meeting] represents a new stage in the nature of relations between the two parties."


EUROPE


RUSSIA: "Peace May Come Tomorrow"


Sergei Guly said in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (3/23): "A peace agreement between Israel and Syria, all but ready, may be signed within the next two months.... This optimistic scenario has become possible thanks to weeks of intensive consultations between the two countries, involving international mediators, among them the chief one, President Clinton.... Should it happen, Clinton, who, like no one else, has seen so many of his peace initiatives implemented--from Ulster to Kosovo--would add another, the most remarkable, plan to his collection."


BRITAIN: "An Opportunity Not To Be Missed"


The independent Financial Times commented (3/23): "This weekend's Geneva summit between President Clinton and Hafez Al-Assad...is an opportunity for peace that must not be missed. It should produce a resumption of Israeli-Syrian negotiations.... Mr. Clinton is right to invest heavily in the Syrian-Israeli peace track. The resolution of the conflict would serve U.S. interests by bringing Syria, one of the region's most hardline states, into the Western orbit and paving the way for normal relations between Israel and other Arab nations.... There is no certainty that the resumption of negotiations will produce an accord. But both sides have a pressing need to hammer out an agreement before the summer."


"Middle East Matrix"


The conservative Times opined (3/21): "When announcing his intention to meet President Assad, Bill Clinton was at pains to stress that he did not wish to raise expectations 'unduly'. The experience of several American presidents in their dealings with the Syrian leadership suggests that caution is well-founded.... This is a complicated diplomatic enterprise with four actors, each working to different domestic deadlines. Mr. Clinton, who leaves office in January, has but a few months to secure a Middle East settlement. Mr. Assad is in poor health and wants to secure the succession for his son, Bashar. Ehud Barak has promised to withdraw the Israeli army from Lebanon by July. Yasser Arafat, whose own physical condition is uncertain, has said

that he will declare a Palestinian state in September. The challenge for those Americans who will oversee the discussions is to draw the sting from the most explosive of these deadlines.


"Mr. Assad may not, however, be willing to make the modest moves that are crucial to an agreement. He may be tempted to exert pressure on Mr. Barak through Hezbollah attacks after July and hope that Israeli-Palestinian relations deteriorate, as they surely would, in the aftermath of any rash declaration of independence by Mr. Arafat. These circumstances, the Syrian president might calculate, would lead Israel to abandon the Palestinian Authority and seek a pact with Damascus instead. Mr. Clinton, and others with influence such as the EU, must convince Mr. Assad to act urgently and Mr. Arafat to avoid inflammatory moves. Both are necessary to allow Mr. Barak to concede more territory."


"Clinton To Meet Assad In Surprise Talks"


The conservative Times reported (3/21): "President Clinton announced yesterday that he will hold a summit with President Assad of Syria on Sunday in what may be the last chance for years to save the faltering Middle East peace process..... The fact that President Assad is prepared to travel, despite his failing health, is taken by observers as a sign that a deal may be in place. The sense of urgency comes from Washington and the Middle East, which see a narrow window before Mr. Clinton becomes indisputably a lame duck, and before Mr. Assad's health worsens."


FRANCE: "The Syrian-American Summit Could Relaunch The Peace Talks"


Georges Marion opined in left-of-center Le Monde (3/22): "In the complicated scenario of Israeli-Syrian talks, this may be just one more episode, like many before and without real consequences. But the announcement made by President Clinton of a meeting in Geneva with President Assad is at least a sign of Washington's further determination to get the Israeli-Syrian talks out of their rut.... This trip to Geneva by Assad, who rarely travels to the West, is the source of speculation in the Israeli press of the Syrian president's bigger commitment to the peace process.... Syria's change in attitude is not readily explained by observers...except to say that Assad may be taking seriously Barak's decision to withdraw unilaterally from South Lebanon."


"A Clinton-Assad Summit For Peace"


Philippe Gelie wrote in right-of-center Le Figaro (3/21): "At the end of his term, President Clinton has no more than a few months to add to his achievements in favor of peace. Assad wants to leave his son and probable heir a country in peace with its neighbors. As for Barak, he has only three months to fulfill his election promise of a Golan withdrawal and a global peace agreement. These three combined urgencies could well serve as an excellent motivation to overcome mutual mistrust.... Is President Clinton ready to take that chance?"


GERMANY: "Clinton Meets Assad--But Without Barak"


Martina Doering noted in an editorial in left-of-center Berliner Zeitung (3/21): "Irrespective of

the degree of consensus Clinton and Assad may achieve in Geneva, everything could fail because of one obstacle: The Israelis have a chance to vote in a referendum on the treaty which Jerusalem concludes with Damascus.... Distrust in Israel is still too great, and the opponents to the treaty are still in a majority. In order to change this, Assad should not meet Clinton but Ehud Barak."


ITALY: "It's De Facto Ready"


Alberto Pasolini Zanelli observed in leading, rightist opposition Il Giornale (3/23): "Clinton...is

not meeting with Assad in a last-minute effort to save peace, but rather to formalize and make solemn a peace that is, de facto, ready. This does not come from America or Syria, but from a man who certainly knows about the subject since he is part of the game--Hosni Mubarak."


"Clinton Hopes Peace Treaty Will Bring Prestige To His Presidency"


Andrea di Robilant filed from Washington in centrist, influential La Stampa (3/21): "Yesterday, when he announced the meeting [with Syrian President Assad] from Bangladesh, the American President invited the media not to feed excessive hopes around the Geneva summit...but White House sources acknowledge that Clinton would have not accepted a meeting with the Syrian president if he did not receive reassuring indications that talks can really restart.... Indeed, Assad counts on the Americans to push Israel to subscribe to an acceptable solution for Damascus too.... Clinton...hopes that a peace treaty between Syria and Israel will bring prestige to his presidency. And that opens the way to an overall peace, which also includes Palestinians and Lebanese."


##

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Department of State

Office of Research

Telephone: (202) 619-6511

10/29/99

# # #



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list