Will Trade Mustard Gas for Power

The plan to destroy Syria’s chemical weapons is being applauded as a diplomatic stroke of genius. But it gives the Syrian dictator time to defeat the uprising against him. The rebels were sacrificed on the altar of Russian-American global politics. This betrayal would have been justified on only one condition.

After it was fait accompli, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, lost deep in thought, strolled along the shores of Lake Geneva. His Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, enjoyed a cigarette. Later, the two foreign ministers — now calling themselves “friends” — sat down to dinner at their hotel, great statesmen who had done their jobs.

Their American-Russian agreement in Geneva is being hailed as a masterpiece. It’s said to be a road map to the ultimate destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons, a bestial arsenal. It could also pave the way for a negotiated settlement in the Levantine civil war that has already killed 100,000. Ideally, it would serve as the cornerstone of trust to solve the most serious Near East problem: The dispute over Iran’s nuclear program.

Could the American-Russian agreement on Syria be the great success of finely tuned power politics?

Enough Time for Assad To Quell the Rebellion

If everything goes according to plan, Syria’s chemical weapons will actually be destroyed within 18 months. But because virtually nothing in this civil war is predictable, a question mark should still be placed at the end of the timetable. What’s certain, however, is the fact that Bashar al-Assad has successfully ransomed himself with his promise to place Syria’s chemical weapons under United Nations supervision, destined for future destruction. The dictator, who has been slaughtering his people for two and a half years, who has regularly been called a diabolical tyrant and warned at least weekly by the White House, the European Union or the Arab League, is suddenly indispensable as the guarantor of a chemical weapons agreement: I’ll swap you sarin and mustard gas if you allow me to continue my brutal rule. That’s the current formula; it points in the wrong direction.

Syria’s ruler now has enough time to put down the rebellion; Moscow is supplying him with the weapons to do so. If that takes longer than expected, he can keep the U.N. inspectors at bay; Saddam Hussein did that for 10 years. If Assad’s soldiers do their job, there won’t be much left to bargain over with the rebels — certainly not Assad’s resignation.

The Americans and Russians have agreed to the framework desired by Syria with their Geneva deal. Assad stays in power for now. Everyone fears the al-Qaida Islamic extremists; no one any longer believes in the democratization of the Middle East. The rebels, whose uprising was stoked by empty promises made in the United States and Europe, will be sacrificed, whether they are all Islamists or not; that’s the way the global power politics game is played.

And that’s backstabbing. It would be justified if it solved the Iran question — the squabble between Washington and Tehran has been crippling the Near and Middle East region for 30 years now. After many disappointments, optimists are putting their hopes in newly elected president Hassan Rohani, but beyond his good wishes on the occasion of the Jewish New Year, he has yet to accomplish anything. A meager basis for great expectations coming from the Geneva agreement.