Signaling Intentions

There is a very telling, to put it mildly, opinion piece in this morning's Daily Star in Beirut written by former U.S. ambassador to both Israel and Egypt, Edward S. Walker Jr. and Maggie Salem: Bush took Hariri's death personally

For more than 25 years, Hariri championed an independent, free and sovereign Lebanon. He did so not as an expatriate, but as a participant in endless cease-fire negotiations, interim arrangements and finally the Taif Accord, which ended the country's 15-year civil war. In peace, he left an even greater legacy, leading his country through a tortuous postwar reconstruction process and restoring Beirut's former glory as a premier tourist destination.

But he will be remembered most for his last act in politics. He resigned in October 2004 after Syrian pressure led Lebanon's Parliament to amend the Constitution and renew the tenure of Damascus' devoted ally, President Emile Lahoud. Many contend that Hariri's principled stand cost him his life.

Tragically, Lebanon's recent history is littered with scores of unsolved assassinations, many attributed to Syria. With their own credibility at stake, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Lahoud must accept offers of international assistance and find those complicit in and responsible for Hariri's death. Pinpointing responsibility will take time. In the interim, and given official Lebanese stonewalling, U.S. President George W. Bush has, quite rightly, withdrawn his ambassador to Syria, Margaret Scobey. French President Jacques Chirac should follow suit. So too should British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Given that Chirac actually went to Lebanon to attend Hariri's funeral it is not too difficult to believe that he and Bush will see eye-to-eye on this matter. Given the amount of widespread disaffection towards Syria evident in Lebanon it will be easier for ANY European power to insist that Syria be held to some level of accountability. What form that accountability takes is up in the air at the moment, but with Bush nothing is off the table. I'd think most everyone knows that by now.

As former diplomats in the region, we would normally champion dialogue. But Syria has abused the process. Assad holds high-level meetings and sends representatives to international forums in an effort to maintain his country's waning role as regional arbiter, and to cloak his regime's actions in the guise of respectability. There is, however, a peculiar disregard for follow-through on the substance of the discussions. Promises made are not kept. Ask any number of visitors to Damascus, from former Secretary of State Colin Powell to the last senior official to visit, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

In naval terms that would be called a shot across Syria's bow. The fact that Ambassador Walker, someone who has enjoyed the confidence of both Democratic and Republican administrations, is the one making these statements lends a great weight to them. I would not be surprised if he had the administration's blessing in making them. It clearly looks like an "unofficial" official statement to the effect that the U.S. is quite serious. If, as the piece suggests, France and Britain actually recall their ambassadors that will only underscore the importance of Ambassador Walker's remarks. It says in effect, this is what we will do; now, watch us do it.

In the weeks before Hariri's death, the opposition had effectively shattered the myth of Lebanon's internal fragility, a myth that sustains Syria's presence. A number of political leaders reached across confessional and personal fault lines to build an alliance that brought into question their neighbor's role in Lebanon's internal affairs. As the aftermath of Hariri's assassination begins, and with the official mourning period ended, Syria will likely revert to its old tricks and use the pretext of potential chaos and unrest to crack down on the opposition.

Damascus would be ill advised to follow such a course.

Washington and Paris must not abandon their commitment to a free Lebanon. There are ample signs that they will stay the course. Chirac was the only head of state present in Beirut for Hariri's funeral services. In Washington, Syria is frequently referred to as "low hanging fruit" and not without reason. Bush pledged in his inaugural address to end tyranny, and his advisers are actively looking for the most expedient ways of fulfilling his vision. What the perpetrators of Monday's attack may have miscalculated is Bush's personal anger with Hariri's assassination, which has just begun to manifest itself; recalling Scobey was only his opening move.

Or, "Just in case you missed the threat Mr. Assad, we can take you out whenever we want to...don't try us." But, now that we have shaken a big stick at them, the carrot is now offered:

Of course, there is a way out of this crisis. But Damascus cannot expect to continue peddling intelligence in Iraq, peace talks with Israel and intercession with Iran to trade off against maintaining its oppressive presence in Lebanon. Talking of an alliance with Iran against outside threats, as Syria did on Wednesday, is an old trick too. Far from scaring the Bush administration, such a move will likely embolden it to take an even harder line with Damascus and Tehran.

While Syria tries to ride out international attention, stave off further sanctions - particularly from the European Union - and recalculate the political price of occupying Lebanon, the Lebanese opposition must maintain pressure and continue to build cross-communal bridges.

In other words, Mr. Assad, the road to Damascus is your only path to salvation. We suggest you and your troops take it.

I, of course, cannot prove that this article was written with the sanction of the Bush White House, but it seems to suit too many needs to have been entirely accidental. From the tone and content of the article the most logical audience for it is the Syrian government. And with our ambassador recalled what could be a better way to do it?