John Kerry or the Hearing Diplomacy

As a symbol of the American will to put down the rising power of Asian economies, Hillary Clinton went to Asia for her first foreign tour. Her successor, John Kerry, chose Europe and the Middle East for his first visit. America doesn’t need to be reminded of the dangerous reality concerning the challenges of the Middle East, from the Arab springs, to Libya or Syria. After having gambled on the G-20 as a new forum for international decision-making during the financial turmoil of 2008, and then the euro crisis, it seems the U.S. has gone back to “the fundamentals” of its alliance with a Europe which clearly remains an “indispensable partner” on the largest issues of the crisis — from Iran to Syria, by way of the Sahel.

According to French diplomatic sources, John Kerry initially hesitated between Europe and the Middle East before finally deciding on the logic of lumping the two destinations together. His 11-day trip will take him to nine different countries. His interviews promised to be dominated by the question of Syria, Iran and Mali.

Kerry seemed to seize on Syria as a top priority, even if the White House still refuses to arm resistance for fear of assisting the Islamists. The new secretary of state was said to hope that “Russia and the United States can still find common ground” to stop the tragedy. Betting on Russian mediation to stop Assad, however, remains a challenge, given the unflagging support Putin has given to Damascus until now, with its position as the final remaining area of Moscow’s influence in the region. The wide chill covering Russian-American relations, as the crisis over the adoption of Russian children highlights, will no doubt help Kerry. The Syrian opposition, even with a chief representative in Moscow, forgoes any political agreement for as long as Assad remains in power during the negotiation. Forever the diplomat, Kerry hopes to find middle ground by convincing Russia that it would be a catastrophe if Syria exploded.

“The Window is Closing”

Iran should also be in a good position during the discussions, which representatives from the United States, Great Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia heading off to Kazakhstan to try to convince the Iranians to give up their nuclear military program. For the Americans, the stopover in Egypt will be critical in order to probe the intentions of Washington’s former ally, now led by an Islamist at odds with the popular movement that led to the “civil revolution” in Tahrir Square.

John Kerry, who spoke of a “listening tour,” let it be known that he would also try to restart peace talks between Israel and Palestine. This issue was dropped by President Obama after his run of bad luck during the first term. The Europeans are delighted by this interest; however, experts are pessimistic on the chances of a breakthrough given the regional and local context. Kerry has to recognize that President Obama, in spite of a planned visit to Israel at the end of March, wasn’t “prepared at this point in time to do more than to listen to the parties.” In short, on Syria, Iran, and Israel, we perceive more of a desire for Kerry to act than for any eventual solutions.

There is one key question intriguing diplomats given the flexibility of this trip vis-à-vis the White House. Why doesn’t he go to Israel three weeks before Obama?