Jordan gathering support for Arab-led Syria peace process
The National, Abu Dhabi: Jordan gathering support for Arab-led Syria peace process, foreign minister says
Speaking to 'The National', Ayman Safadi expresses hope that Yemen truce will be renewed and says Amman is ready to deal with any realities from the Israeli elections.
Amman is gathering regional and international support for an Arab-led political process to end the war in Syria, Jordan's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs?Ayman Safadi?told?The National.
The push for an Arab initiative to end the?11-year-old conflict comes?as the US dials back its condemnation of governments normalising relations with Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, whose grip on power was cemented by Russia’s military intervention, and as Syria’s neighbours engage with Damascus on the issue of sending refugees home.
Jordan is advocating “a collective Arab role to bring about an end to that crisis, in co-ordination with our friends and partners", Mr Safadi said in an exclusive interview on the sidelines of the?UN General Assembly?in New York.
Mr Safadi said Arabs must pursue a "step-by-step approach" and lead in resolving the Syrian conflict.
“We've got, as Arabs, to assume our role in efforts to bring an end to the Syrian catastrophe," he said.
"There's been no real process to address that crisis in the past few years, it's been status quo politics, and we cannot live with status quo politics."
Jordan hosts about 760,000 Syrian refugees, the UN reported, and its efforts to find a mechanism for a voluntary safe return have been unsuccessful.
“The devastating consequences of the Syrian crisis continues ... Refugees are not going back, the economy is suffering and millions of Syrians are living under the poverty line,†Mr Safadi said.
An Arab-led process would include Saudi Arabia and other nations, he explained, and would be based on UN Resolutions 2254 and 2642, which lay out a road map for a negotiated settlement as well as authorisations for the monitoring and delivery of humanitarian aid to Syria.
“We want to see under 2642 how we can really accelerate the early recovery projects. We’re extremely concerned with the situation in the south [of Syria, bordering Jordan]. We need stability in the south, and the drug trafficking threat is a major threat to us,†Jordan’s top diplomat said.
Asked about the impact of US sanctions and Washington's views on an Arab-led a process, Mr Safadi appeared cautiously optimistic that such hurdles can be overcome.
“I can safely say that everybody wants to see an end to this crisis. And everybody is open to any mechanism that can deliver an end to this crisis,†he said.
In an interview with?The National?last week,?Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdullah Bou Habib said that unlike in the past, the?US during this year's General Assembly did not raise objections to normalisation efforts?with the Assad regime.
Mr Safadi, who visited Washington this month, is expected to return to the US capital to discuss a?memorandum of understanding?between the US and Jordan.
Amman has also been helping to mediate in the war in Yemen, where a?fragile truce is set to expire?on Sunday.
“We are hopeful that the truce will be renewed — and must be renewed — because the cost of not renewing it will be disastrous for the Yemeni people,†Mr Safadi said.
But, he noted, any renewal is in the hands of the Houthi rebels, who should “deliver on their commitments and to show goodwill".
On the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Mr Safadi said Amman is concerned about the risks of a collapse of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank, where the economy is sputtering and the security situation is deteriorating.
“We are extremely worried about the situation there," Mr Safadi said, as the PA "is facing tremendous challenges".
"We are focusing on maintaining calm and we're engaging with all parties and with the Americans to minimise friction points."
While at the General Assembly, Jordan participated in a Saudi-led ministerial meeting with European and US delegates to jump-start the Arab Peace Initiative.
The 2002 plan calls for peace with Israel, but only after it agrees to the creation of a Palestinian state and withdraws from land captured during the Six Day War of 1967.
“It's been 20 years since this initiative was put on the table. We believe the Arab Peace Initiative was the most comprehensive offer for the achievement of comprehensive peace," Mr Safadi said.
"The meeting was a message that we are still as Arabs committed to comprehensive and lasting peace."
He also welcomed Israeli Prime Minister?Yair Lapid's apparent embrace of a two-state-solution?during his address to the General Assembly.
“It is a change - this is the first Israeli prime minister since 2017 to speak publicly on the two-state-solution,†he said.
Asked about Israeli elections on November 1 — the country's fifth in three years — and if the potential return of Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party is a concern for Jordan, Mr Safadi said Amman will pursue a realistic approach.
“Setbacks have always been a part of the [Palestinian-Israeli] process. We'll deal with whatever realities emerge in Israel, but what will not change is our position,†he said.
On Iran, Mr Safadi?echoed comments?from other diplomats, saying any new nuclear deal is "stuck for now".
The “big question is, how much of an impact it [any future deal] will have on regional stability", he said.
Mr Safadi said he had met Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian and brought up the issue of drug smuggling into Jordan from Syria, an activity reportedly conducted by pro-Iranian militias.
“The issue of drug smuggling from Syria to Jordan is a major challenge,†he said.
Asked about Jordan’s and Egypt’s talks with Lebanon to ship gas and electricity via Syria, Mr Safadi said an agreement has been completed but they are waiting for US sanctions clearance and Beirut agreeing to?World Bank reforms.
++++++++++
领英推è
eu observer: 'Collective guilt' — the dilemma of penalising Russia's opposition
By?RADEK SIKORSKI AND SIX OTHERS - VILNIUS, WARSAW, PARIS, BERLIN, BRATISLAVA, TODAY, 10:51
With Vladimir Putin's escalation of the war against Ukraine through military mobilisation and the subsequent fear and unrest in Russia itself, the question of Putin's political future and possible regime change in Russia has reappeared as a topic in the world's democracies.
Meanwhile, in this context, the East-West?split in the EU?over Russian tourist visas in August (temporarily settled by a compromise) points to a larger dilemma: how should the EU, and indeed the entire West, view Russia's democratic opposition (even if it is currently mostly in exile or in prison)? Should the concept of collective guilt be applied to Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine?
Combined with the renewed unrest in Russia, both from the nationalist right, but also from a reawakened non-authoritarian centre, this dilemma can only gain in relevance as the war in Ukraine progresses, and relations between the EU and a future Russia become even more relevant.
There is now a growing disparity between those in the EU that believe Russian democrats should receive further support, and those who advocate cutting ties with all Russians, declaring the Russian people per se responsible for the war.
The first group believes in the possibility of a Russian democracy.
The second is extremely sceptical, to say the least, regarding the chances of a future Russian democracy that will agree to be held accountable for the current war.
This second group does not believe in a real possibility of democracy in Russia because they believe that the majority of the Russian people genuinely support Putin's aggression, as the?Levada Center's recent opinion polls?were showing.
For the time being, this second group of 'non-believers' has a majority among Europeans, it seems. This second group of Europeans is scared not only by Putin's aggression but also by the condition of the Russian nation.
That fear is especially prominent in the northern and eastern European countries, which are neighbouring Russia and have historical experience with Russian imperial aggressiveness, which explains their advocacy to?prohibit tourist visas for all Russians. That fear is not so observable in the southern and western European countries, and this is what makes EU's East-West division visible.
Believers vs non-believers
However, the real division in Europe on this issue is not between southwest and northeast. The real division is between 'believers' and 'non-believers' in Russian democracy.
Some of those who do not believe in the democratic future of Russia also tend to declare that all Russians are guilty and responsible for Putin's aggression. Other 'non-believers' simply do not see the need to engage with Russian democrats and they are ready to arrange themselves with permanent neighbourhood to an authoritarian Russia, and some are even ready to maintain "a dialogue" with such a Russia.
In the fresh debate about Russians' reactions to Ukraine's successful counteroffensive, each side sees its view corroborated: while believers emphasise the renewed courage of democrats such as the growing number of city council members from Moscow and St Petersburg, non-believers tend to draw attention to Putin's critics from the Right, in TV talk shows and social media.
We believe that, in the current situation, Putin can only profit from an isolation of Russia's democrats — whether in exile or in Russia itself.
Ukrainians' rejection of any future relationship with the entirety of the Russian nation is understandable.
The distrust of non-believers in EU and Nato member states vis-Ã -vis all Russians has a logical basis in the developments of the last 22 years. West Europeans need to acknowledge this more clearly.
And yet, it would be folly to forego a strong anti-Putin alliance including democratically-minded Russians. Just as the allies of the World War II anti-Hitler alliance included German democrats, Putin's Russian democratic enemies are essential to bring Putin down, and at least open up the chance of a better Russia.
A possible military defeat for Russia in Ukraine may very likely result in a regime change in Russia itself, and while there is no certainty about its character and direction, by the time Putin leaves the Kremlin — probably against his will — Russia will be in such a terrible state that his successors will have very strong incentives to fundamentally change the direction of the country.
While an even further radicalisation of Russia's posture is possible in the short-run, such a development will prove unsustainable for Russia, and change is then very likely to take a radically different direction: a clear departure from the oppression at home and the aggression abroad of the Putin era.
For this moment, the West needs to be prepared. It is therefore essential to cultivate close ties to those Russians that will be indispensable to a radical change of course of the country.
The precedent of the Nazis
Those Russians who have suffered under Putin, been imprisoned by his regime and taken personal risks that most Westerners have never known in their lifetimes, deserve the clear support of the West.
Their networks in Russia should be supported by whatever means still possible. Their organisations and structures in exile should receive every imaginable political and material support — provided, of course, they have clear anti-Kremlin credentials.
In the first years after the defeat of Hitler's Germany in 1945, "collective guilt" — blaming all Germans for Nazi aggression — was the guideline for the Allies to deal with the German people.
This strategy was deliberately ended after it was understood that the building of a democratic Germany would be jeopardised in this manner. Collective guilt was replaced by a more selective approach in which Germans who had demonstrably resisted the Nazis, were fully integrated into the effort of remaking Germany.
Of course, history doesn't repeat itself. But it rhymes.
The West should heed the lessons of history. Russia's democrats are essential for building a better Russia, and a better future for all of Europe.
AUTHOR BIO
Radek Sikorski?MEP is a former foreign minister of Poland.?Andrius Kubilius?MEP is a former prime minister of Lithuania.?W?odzimierz Cimoszewicz?MEP is a former prime minister of Poland.?Bernard Guetta?is a French MEP with Renew Europe.?Sergey Lagodinsky?is a German MEP with the Greens.?Anders ?slund?is an economist and former senior fellow with the Atlantic Council think-tank.?Roland Freudenstein?is vice-president of?GLOBSEC, a think tank in Bratislava.
+++++++++++++++
JamNews.
Уже Ñедьмой день на пограничном пункте ?Верхний ЛарÑ? на грузино-роÑÑийÑкой границе ÑтоÑÑ‚ многокилометровые очереди. Рпоток машин и людей, прибывающих из?РоÑÑии?в?Грузию,?не уменьшаетÑÑ.
The End+++++++++++++
Intersting...