Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Bush administration officials yesterday reaffirmed their concerns that Syria has WMD programs and supports terrorism and they issued tacit support for a bill that would impose economic sanctions against Damascus for such activities. Several Middle East experts said yesterday, however, that a more balanced policy of both “carrots and sticks” was needed toward Syria (see GSN, Oct. 16).

In a speech yesterday in London, U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton outlined U.S. assessments of Syria’s WMD capabilities. He described Syria’s chemical weapons program as “one of the most advanced Arab state” programs and said that Damascus both has stockpiles of usable sarin agent and is working to develop more toxic chemical agents such as VX. In addition, the United States also believes that Syria is working to develop an “offensive biological weapons capability,” Bolton said.

In Washington, State Department counterterrorism coordinator Cofer Black yesterday told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that there is “little” evidence that Syria is reducing its support of terrorism. That support, when combined with WMD aims, poses a significant threat to the United States, he said.

“A threat to our country posed by states who both sponsor terrorism and pursue weapons of mass destruction is one which we cannot and will not ignore. Syria, a sponsor of numerous terrorist organizations, is a country whose actions we must follow carefully in this regard,” Black said.

He added, however, that there is no evidence that Syria has transferred weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups or that Damascus would allow terrorists to obtain such weapons.

Earlier this month, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to approve the Syrian Accountability Act, which would impose a ban on the export of U.S. military and dual-use items to Syria. The bill would also require the president to impose at least two of six additional sanctions included in the bill against Syria, such as a freeze of Syrian assets and a downgrading of U.S. diplomatic representation. The president would have the authority, however, to issue a six-month waiver of the six additional sanctions for national security reasons. Once imposed, the sanctions in the bill could only be lifted if the president were to certify that four conditions are met, including that Syria no longer provides support for terrorism and that it has ceased the development of biological and chemical weapons. 

Andy Fisher, a spokesman for Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), told Global Security Newswire today that the Syrian Accountability Act could be brought to the Senate floor for a vote at any time. The Senate version of the bill contains an amendment that would broaden the presidential waiver authority to allow the president to waive both sets of included sanctions, he said.

“There will be little or no opposition” to the bill when it comes up for a vote, Fisher said.

In testimony yesterday before the Senate foreign affairs panel, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs William Burns reiterated the Bush administration’s tacit support for the Syria sanctions bill, describing the current state of U.S.-Syrian relations as “poor.”

“The administration’s position … is that we are not going to oppose its passage,” Burns said.

The White House chose to not oppose the bill because other long-standing efforts have failed to alter Syrian behavior, Burns said.

“I’m not sure if it was an all-of-a-sudden decision as much as it is an accumulation of efforts on our part that didn’t produce, haven’t yet produced all the results we want to see. We’re going to keep at it, keep open the possibility of more normal relations. But that’s going to require tangible actions on the part of the Syrian leadership,” Burns said.

Burns said in his testimony that he was unsure how strongly the bill would affect Syrian policies, but said he was hopeful it would be positive.

“It’s hard to predict what the impact is going to be. We certainly hope that passage of the act, should it be passed, as well as our continuing direct efforts with the Syrians, our efforts with the Europeans and others, is going to have an impact, a positive impact,” Burns said.

“Both Carrots and Sticks” Needed, Experts SaySeveral Middle East experts told the committee yesterday, however, that the threat of additional sanctions alone would not be enough to affect Syrian policies regarding terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

“When we in the United States use the old stick approach with Syria, the best we can get is half-hearted cooperation,” said Murhaf Jouejati of the Middle East Institute. “By using your stick, Mr. chairman, we are unwittingly delaying the reforms in Syria that we are hoping for,” he added.

Flynt Leverett of the Brookings Institution said that a lack of discussion in U.S. foreign policy on providing benefits to Damascus for its cooperation on issues of concern represents a “serious deficiency in the policy debate right now.”

“The consistent message that I hear from Syria with regard to our policy differences with the regime in Damascus is, ‘You keep telling us you want us to change our behavior, but you won’t tell us what’s in it for us if we do,’” Leverett said. “I think we should make it clear both what is in it for Syria is it behaves more constructively, and what will happen to them if they don’t behave more constructively,” he said.

Leverett proposed that a “sunset provision” be included to the sanctions bill, which would force the president and the Congress to later re-examine the bill to see if its measures were effective. He also called for the United States to develop a “road map” to address Syria’s support for terrorism — an approach that would include both calls for Damascus to take verifiable steps against terrorist groups and the promise of removing Syria from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism if it were to do so.