Is The Road To Peace Through Damascus?

As I conclude my research in Damascus, I remember the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi when she stated in a press conference after talks with President Bashar al-Assad that, 'the road to Damascus is a road to peace.'

Since arriving in Syria two months ago, I have questioned the validity of this statement. There is a debate within the United States about whether we should engage Syria to help solve regional conflicts. We question Syria's sincerity in its calls for dialogue with the United States. We question whether Syria actually has the clout in the Arab world to assist in stabilizing conflicts in the region. The only way to evaluate the value of dialogue with Syria is to first analyze the interests of all parties involved.

The United States wants Syria's cooperation in Iraq primarily for controlling its border and perhaps even in dealing with clashing factions inside of Iraq. We also want Syria's cooperation with the investigation of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Mister Rafiq al-Hariri and in resolving Lebanon's political crisis. Finally, we want Syria to distance itself from Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas.

From the United States, Syria would like to be assured that the outcomes of the Hariri tribunal are not used as a political tool to destabilize its regime and wants the United States' support in facilitating negotiations with Israel over the Golan Heights. In addition, Syria would seek to retain its influence in Lebanon and to obtain economic incentives from the West.

Although weakened in the Middle East due to the war in Iraq, the United States still has carrots to offer the Syrian government in return for its cooperation. We have strong ties with Israel. We also have influence over pro-American factions in Lebanon who are in a political deadlock with pro-Syrian factions. In addition, the United States can offer economic incentives that could benefit Syria as it tries to liberalize its struggling economy.

At the same time, the United States can benefit from Syria's influence in the Middle East. Syria has close ties with Iran, shares a long, not-so-secure border with Iraq, and has strong relationships with Hezbollah, Hamas and various groups in Iraq.

While many argue that negotiating with Syria would show a sign of weakness by the United States, I disagree. We can test Syria's sincerity without making any compromises. We will never know Syria's genuineness or ability to deliver on promises unless we attempt to engage them. Since 2005, we have not had an ambassador in Syria. Moreover, frequent statements from the White House criticizing Damascus will not encourage the Syrian regime to act in a productive manner. The reality of diplomacy is that it is a give-and-take process and in today's world without cooperation, even at times from one's enemy, progress on important issues cannot be made.

Keeping this in mind, both sides should realize they will not get everything they want from the other. For example, it is unrealistic to think that United States will support allowing Syria to have free reign in Lebanon or that Syria will completely cut its ties with Iran. However, the status quo of isolating Damascus has not worked, and the situation in the Middle East continues to deteriorate. We must have new direction and new ideas to solve regional conflicts and to increase stability. The United States has an embassy in Damascus. Syria has an embassy in Washington. It is about time both sides put them to use.