Regional embrace of Syria's Assad puts US in tight spot
Pigeons fly next to an election campaign billboard depicting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a candidate for the presidential vote, in the capital Damascus, on May 25, 2021. - LOUAI BESHARA/AFP via Getty Image

Regional embrace of Syria's Assad puts US in tight spot

Al-Monitor.

The Takeaway: Regional embrace of Syria's Assad puts US in tight spot

January 5, 2023

The Biden administration has issued another warning to Syria’s neighbors against boosting ties with President?Bashar al-Assad, but critics say the administration could be doing more to prevent Damascus’ return to the Arab fold.?

On Wednesday, Emirati Foreign Minister?Abdullah bin Zayed?met with Assad in the Syrian capital for the second time since November 2021. Their latest meeting follows Assad’s?March 2022 visit?to the United Arab Emirates — his first to an Arab country since the Syrian revolution erupted in 2011.?

In a further sign of the region’s warming to Assad, the defense chiefs of Turkey and Syria?held talks in Moscow?last week. As?Nazlan Ertan?writes, their first official engagement in more than a decade came on the heels of?several Turkish overtures to Damascus?in the second half of 2022, including Turkish President?Recep Tayyip Erdogan?himself raising the possibility of an Assad meeting.?

On Tuesday, State Department spokesperson?Ned Price?told reporters the administration does not support countries “upgrading their relations or expressing support to rehabilitate the brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad.”?

"We urge states to carefully consider the Assad regime's atrocious human rights record of the past 12 years as it continues to inflict atrocities on the Syrian people and to deny access to life-saving humanitarian aid," Price said.

The Biden administration has repeatedly said it has no plans to “normalize or upgrade” its severed relations with the Syrian government, nor does it support regional states doing so. Lawmakers?on both sides of the aisle?have urged Biden to?keep the pressure?on Syria’s neighbors through the so-called Caesar Act.

The bipartisan legislation that took effect in 2020 authorizes broad penalties against anyone —?Syrian or foreign — who provides support for the regime’s military operations or knowingly does business with the government, specifically in the construction, engineering, aviation and energy sectors. The Trump administration issued several rounds of sanctions under this authority, but since coming into office, the Biden administration has yet to issue Caesar-specific sanctions on Assad’s benefactors.?

“The Biden administration refuses to target economically significant figures,” said?David Adesnik,?director of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “The administration has sanctioned military and intelligence officers guilty of terrible crimes, but never those who finance the regime.”?

This year, members of the GOP-controlled House are likely to push for greater use and strengthening of Syria sanctions, a senior Republican congressional staffer told Al-Monitor.

“Generally, Republicans are deeply frustrated that there has been almost no Caesar sanctions enforcement under Biden,” the staffer said.?

There’s also Democratic interest in stepping up sanctions on Syria.?A January 2022 letter?signed by the top Democrats and Republicans on Congress’ foreign affairs panels urged Biden to make better use of the Caesar Act and “consider consequences” for countries who seek to rehabilitate Assad.??

As the region’s diplomatic outreach to Damascus continues, the Biden administration is in “a very tricky place with very few cards to play,” short of threatening sanctions against US allies and partners, says?Charles Lister,?a Syria expert at the Middle East Institute.?

Biden has so far approached the ruinous civil war in Syria as a crisis to be contained, says Lister, but “it is not enough to have a status quo policy when the many actors around us are all moving and seeking to change the dynamic.”?

The Takeaway: Regional embrace of Syria's Assad puts US in tight spot - Al-Monitor: Independent, trusted coverage of the Middle East

+++++++++

Papst tr?gt Papst zu Grabe - Abschied von Benedikt XVI. in Rom

No alt text provided for this image
Benedikt XVI. wurde am Donnerstagvormittag im Vatikan zu Grabe getragen.Foto: picture alliance/dpa | Oliver Weiken


+++++

A pope for the ages, and for the Jews

The late Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI formulated a mighty defense against Jew-hatred in all its forms.

By Caroline Glick

No alt text provided for this image
Pope Benedict XVI with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during an official departure ceremony at Ben-Gurion Airport near Tel Aviv, Israel, May 15, 2009. Photo: Nati Shohat/Flash 90

(January 4, 2023?/?JNS)?Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who passed away this week at the age of 95, was a historically significant figure for many reasons: He was the first pope in six centuries to retire, rather than die in office. He was the first German pope in postwar history. He was also a friend of the Jews.

To be sure, Benedict’s restoration of the Latinate mass, which includes a prayer for Jews to convert to Christianity, raised the hackles of many American Jewish leaders. But in a fundamental way, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu noted in his condolence remarks, Benedict XVI was “a true friend of the State of Israel and the Jewish people.”

Speaking of Benedict, Netanyahu recalled the former pontiff’s 2009 visit to Israel as a meaningful testament to his commitment “to the historic reconciliation between the Catholic Church and the Jewish people.”

“In my meeting with him,” Netanyahu said, “he spoke warmly about the common heritage of Christianity and Judaism and the values that this heritage gave to all of humanity.”

At least for non-Christians, Benedict’s most historically significant expression and defense of the basis of Judeo-Christian heritage was his address at the University of Regensburg in Sept. 2006. There, Benedict used an obscure dialogue between the long-forgotten 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and a Persian Muslim to discuss the basis of modern Christianity and Western civilization.

In Benedict’s telling, Paleologus challenged his Muslim interlocutor, “Show me what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

Benedict then quoted Lebanese Catholic theologian Theodore Khoury saying, “For Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent, his will is not bound up with any of our categories.”

Khoury’s claim was that, unlike Christianity, Islam is entirely based on faith, untethered to reason. Benedict’s fundamental point was that meaningful interfaith dialogue between Christians and Muslims can only be predicated on faith tempered by reason. And in the absence of reason, no meaningful dialogue is possible. His was a challenge to Muslims to show that reason has pride of place in their faith.

Muslim fanatics in Judea and Samaria responded to Benedict’s speech by burning churches. In Iraq, they beheaded a priest. In Somalia, they murdered a nun. The Pakistani parliament passed a unanimous resolution condemning the pontiff. Calls to murder Benedict were heard throughout the Islamic world. In other words, the jihadists proved by their own actions that jihadist Islam rejects reason and anyone who advocates on its behalf.

They weren’t the only ones condemning Benedict. The international left—including its representatives within the Catholic Church— harshly criticized Benedict for what progressives viewed as politically incorrect, culturally insensitive and Islamophobic remarks.

The response to Benedict’s statement by both sides of the Red-Green alliance was notable because it showed that what binds woke progressives and Islamists isn’t a shared vision of what the world should look like, but their common rejection of reason. Progressive identity politics, victim culture and hatred of the West form the basis of a faith just as powerful—and unreasoned—as jihadist Islam.

And this brings us to why Benedict was a friend of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. Notably, and not incidentally, one of the common foundations of cultures characterized by a rejection of reason is Jew-hatred.

Regardless of its source or manifestation, Jew-hatred is a form of unreasoned faith—of fanaticism. Scapegoating Jews, blaming Jews as individuals, as a community, a religion, a nation or a state for all the ills suffered by whatever particular group, is a powerful tool for political mobilization. Jew-hatred is a source of political power because anti-Jewish leaders are able to tell their followers an easy story: The Jews are our misfortune. I’ll punish or get rid of the Jews. I’ll get rid of the misfortune.

The notion is both stupid and insane. But that is part of its power. If you reject reason, you don’t need proof. You act on pure faith. You believe.

The basic illogic of Jew-hatred makes it elastic and enduring. Jew-haters take the?zeitgeist?of whatever age they live in or creed they live by and define Jews as its antithesis. In Christendom, Jews were the anti-Christ. Religion went out of fashion in the era of Enlightenment. Racism became the rage. So, Jew haters in the era of racism redefined the Jews as a race, called the “Semites.” Out of touch Christian Judeophobia of yesteryear was relaunched as the fashionable and sophisticated “antisemitism” and voila! A proto-Nazi political movement was born.

In the meantime, capitalists said Jews were communists, and communists said Jews were capitalists.

In our post-Holocaust era, antisemitism is unfashionable. Post-nationalism and anti-Western anti-colonialism are all the rage. So, a few decades ago, the new sophisticates repackaged old-fashioned Jew-hatred to align it with the new?zeitgeist. Anti-Zionism was launched as a pillar of the post-nationalist, anti-Western creed. For Jew-haters, the beauty of anti-Zionism was its utility as a political defense. The new, refined Jew-haters protest: We don’t hate Jews, per se. Indeed, some of our best friends are anti-Zionist Jews. We just reject the morality of the very existence of the largest Jewish community in the world, and the legitimacy of secular Jewish Zionist identity across the world.

In this rejection of the Jewish state, and the notion that Jews have a right to national self-determination, the progressives find allies in Islamic Jew-haters. Both have worldviews and creeds defined by their rejection of reason. And both use Jew-hatred as an instrumental means to rally the faithful and demonstrate their faith. As they have been throughout history, Israel and its Jewish supporters are an easy bogeyman, because there is only one Jewish state, and less than ten million more Jews worldwide.

Benedict’s speech at Regensburg was both a defense of reasoned Christianity and a strike at unreasoned fanaticism—Islamist or otherwise. As such, it was a profound defense against Jew-hatred in all its forms. Since the beginning of the current century, the Red-Green alliance has been the most powerful force assaulting the Jewish state and Jewish people in Israel and the Diaspora. Our greatest allies in the fight against both radical Islam and post-nationalist woke totalitarians are men and women like Benedict, who reject the culture of fanaticism.

For his courageous efforts to combat that culture, most memorably expressed in his speech at the University of Regensburg, and to cultivate a world of reasoned belief, Benedict deserves our enduring appreciation and respect.

Caroline Glick is an award-winning columnist and author of The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East.

A pope for the ages, and for the Jews - JNS.org

The End+++++++++

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了