Progress on Syria and Libya: it should be possible

The efforts being led these days by John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov regarding Libya and Syria should be recognised. They are spending a good amount of time in Vienna and around. And they have also been wise in terms of keeping the UN on board and at the centre of the processes. If they keep this kind of engagement we should be able to see some progress. Actually, when it comes to Libya, it is now obvious that things have started to move in the right direction. The EU should come out clearly in support of these efforts. That should be done as a single voice. Through the EU High Representative, if possible.

There is no Syrian ownership of the peace talks

The Syrian Geneva process is clearly owned and directed by foreigners: the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia and somehow the UN, through its Special Envoy. The Syrian side – the many parties to the conflict – are sitting in the margins or squarely outside, far out. They are not committed to the process, one should add. And if that is the case I do not see how such an exercise can achieve any meaningful and durable results.  

"Cessation of hostilies"

After today´s announcement of a “cessation of hostilities” in Syria, some commentators have shown a lot of scepticism about the effective implementation of such an agreement. The doubts are even stronger because the declaration was basically a joint statement by the US and Russia, with no apparent or implicit involvement by the Syrian parties to the conflict. 

My position on this proclamation is clear. I want to believe that the Americans and the Russians are indeed committed to creating the very minimal conditions for the political negotiations to take off the ground. I also think they would like some kind of humanitarian assistance to be facilitated. Assistance is urgently required in many areas of the country. Some pause on the war would make it possible to reach many of those in need.

As I am ready to accept the good faith of the declaration, I should also add that we are still far from the beginning of a true peace process. But at least there is some movement now and one has to clutch whatever little candle of hope is flaming. Even when the flame is pretty tenuous. 

Model politician 2015

My question of yesterday about the model politician in 2015 has been responded to by a number of friends. And obviously, Angela Merkel and Pope Francis came out as this year´s top leaders.

I am certainly in agreement. But for different reasons, I found John Kerry the most inspiring politician of the year. He is no longer a young man. At his age, many would be writing their memories or playing golf.

Not John Kerry. He has shown energy, determination, optimism. He has achieved results in an environment, both domestic and international, that was far from favourable. I decided therefore to recognise his untiring efforts in the opinion piece I have just written and that will be published in tomorrow´s edition of the Visão magazine in Portugal. 

Syria: the key Foreign ministers should remain closely engaged

One can have plenty of doubts about the realism and feasibility of the UN Security Council resolution on Syria, adopted yesterday. However, in view of the extreme complex situation the country is going through, a situation that has lasted now for too long, any move by the UN should be appreciated and encouraged. Particularly this one that has been discussed at the level of Foreign ministers. Actually, the continued personal involvement of the ministers will be required as we go into the implementation phase. That´s the best way to ensure that they see this process as being under their direct responsibility. The UN Special Envoy, Staffan de Mistura, can be the personification of the international community´s commitment to Syria. But he will need the unswerving support of the key ministers. That will be key for any progress to take place. 

Supporting the Vienna process on Syria

A week ago, I criticised the conveners of the Vienna meeting on Syria for not inviting the UN and EU. Now, after today´s new round of discussions in Vienna, I should commend the US and Russia for bringing to the room not only the UN and the EU, but also the other countries that can have an impact on the solution of the long lasting civil war. It was particularly important to have Iran in the conversation.

This basically means that for the first time, after so many years of destruction and human pain, there is a bit of hope for the Syrians. The road ahead is still very difficult. But at least the diplomacy is now seriously trying to initiate a peace process.

The next step is to find a way of bringing in the Syrian representatives themselves. I am confident that it should be possible, if all those who met in Vienna today do their honest part of the bargain.

It is also critically important to intensify the destruction of the Islamic State leadership and power structures. For that to happen, one has to be very frank and have the courage to denounce any double game that might occur in the future. We cannot accept a country sits in Vienna and talks about the future of a peaceful Syria and, at the same time, keeps somehow supporting the terrorists.

Syria: calling for a renewed diplomatic effort

John Kerry, the US State Secretary, and Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister met today in Vienna with their counterparts from Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The meeting was about the Syrian conflict and how to get it resolved, after almost five years of civil war and unimaginable suffering.

These four people represent countries that can play an important role in bringing peace back to Syria. Their countries are not the only ones that matter but in many ways they play a major role in the region and can for sure markedly influence the course of events. It is therefore encouraging to see them around the same table. And they should continue the consultations, even if their interests are very distinct, as it is time to see an end to the Syrian tragedy.

I have also noted that the EU was not part of the discussion. It should. The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Federica Mogherini, has to claim a seat around this table. The EU´s potential role both during the peace negotiations and the reconstruction of Syria cannot be ignored.

The UN has also been side-lined. The Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, Staffan de Mistura, has disappeared from the radar. That needs to be changed immediately. The UN´s participation is critical for the credibility of the Secretary-General and to augment the legitimacy of the current efforts. Here, as in the case of the EU, there is a need to be strong and call for recognition.

UN cannot be missing in action

The agreement reached between the two presidential candidates is key for the stability and security of Afghanistan. Ashraf Ghani, the future president, and Abdullah Abdullah,  who will have his nominees in key positions within the new Cabinet and as governors of some provinces, are both top politicians and very reasonable, experienced individuals. They are among the best in the country´s political class. But they represent different domestic interests as their tribal links are based on geography and ethnic politics. The agreement between them should therefore be seen as a balancing act between the tribes from the North, closer to Abdullah, and the South that basically supports Ghani.

The balance was struck thanks to the continued efforts of John Kerry and the US ambassador in Kabul. The US made the agreement possible.

This has shown, as it is nowadays happening quite often, that the UN mission in the country has not been able to play the mediation role they should have. This is no good news. Particularly because the same weak role is now the trademark of the UN in some other conflicts around the world.

It might be the moment to raise one or two questions about the current state of affairs of the UN´s peace-making efforts.

Fortunately, on the same day the deal was announced in Kabul, the UN envoy in Yemen was in a position to convince the warring parties in that collapsing country to sign a ceasefire accord. That´s a bit of good news about the UN. But it is not enough. 

I appreciate John Kerry´s efforts

Copyright V.Angelo

The UN in South Sudan needs teeth

John Kerry, who was visiting Luanda today, has shown he is deeply concerned with the crisis situation in South Sudan. The civil war is going on. It is even getting more violent, now that talks about talks between the two main opposing parties are being aired. For the Americans, South Sudan is important. The country has a large interest group in the US, particularly amongst the Christian fundamentalists. That´s politically relevant.

The UN mission in South Sudan – UNMISS – has been politically weak. And it has also lacked the strength and the will to have a more robust security role. It is time for the Americans to raise that matter with the UN Secretary-General. And to help the SG to find the right response to the weaknesses. It is not good for the UN´s image and work in the region to been seen as unable to have a stronger and clearer stance on the South Sudanese crisis. 

Diplomacy as part of a wider package

The agreement reached today in Geneva regarding Ukraine´s crisis is encouraging. We will see if it is implemented. But the fact that the parties, including Russia and the US, could agree on a way forward reminds us that we should keep talking, when there is a conflict, we should not cut off the bridges. That does not mean we should only try diplomacy. Actually diplomacy works better when it is combined with a full range of other measures, such as smart sanctions, military posture and deterrence, unity within the allies, and a clear political position. 

Kerry and Netanyahu

The Israeli government has no love lost for John Kerry. Benjamin Netanyahu and his inner circle are deeply irritated by Kerry´s continued efforts to bring peace to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. They let that displeasure be known through informal channels. When they meet the US Secretary of State they seem to be willing to play the diplomatic game. But they are not. And that´s why they have cancelled the release of the last batch of Palestinian prisoners that should have found their freedom days ago. More. They have decided to build extra settlements -700 new homes – in occupied land in the East Jerusalem area.

Israel top leaders believe they can only count on their own means to protect their country. They see the emergence of a Palestinian State as a serious threat to their own security. They prefer the current status quo. But the present arrangement has no real future. It is a major source of conflict a very serious violation of basic principles of international law. Sooner or later, both sides will have to find a more accommodating solution. The ball, however, is more on the Israeli camp than on the other side. This is a debate the Israelis should have among themselves. 

Putin's writings

President Putin’s opinion text in the New York Times is worth the reading. First, it is well written. Second, it says a few things that make sense, including the reference to the “exceptionalism” the US claim. Third, it keeps the door open for dialogue.

But it is also an extraordinary piece of cynicism. Many of the accusations he implies against the US can also be made towards Russia, including an extreme form of Russian nationalism that is not far from the American exceptionalism.

The wise thing to do is to take the good points he makes and engage the Russians on them. That’s why the meeting that is taking place in Geneva between Secretary Kerry and Minister Lavrov is of great importance. It has, however, to produce concrete results. Time is of the essence. Agreements and action plans, and above all a UN Security Council Resolution on the destruction of Syria’s chemical arsenal, need to be out and running soonest.

Furthermore, besides addressing the chemical weapons issue it is also critical to bring to justice the perpetrators of the 21 August massacres. A Resolution on this matter is also necessary.

With all this in mind, Syria’s case remains the priority number one in the global lists of issues. The daily death toll and the incredible number of refugees and internally displaced people are a reminder of that. A painful reminder, a dramatic reality for millions of people. 

A very good gaffe

John Kerry’s remark on the international control of Syrian chemical weapons might have been a blunder. But thanks to Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, the blunder has become a tiny window of opportunity. And in a world that is tired of wars and abominates state-sponsored violence, as well as all types of violent conflict, the blunder is now a powerful argument against one-sided strikes.

History is so often built on blunders. And historical blunders have led to so many disasters. Maybe this time we will have a positive development coming out of a gaffe. 

Poor minds, strong wills

I watched today’s hearing on Syria and have to say that I was not particularly impressed by the Senators that raised the questions. They obviously lacked a strategic view of the issue and a very limited understanding of the Middle East and the European capabilities –which are very small, when it comes to the ability to strike in a foreign land like Syria.

John Kerry, on the other side of the table, was much more strategic. He was able to contain his contempt for some of the questions. Only in one occasion he was about to go beyond a restrained approach.

General Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was also very professional. I wonder what he thought of some the Senators’ interventions. Not much, I guess. These military top guys have a very low opinion about the professional politicians.

In any case, it seems now clear that the Congress will approve President Obama’s resolution on Syria. For a “limited and narrow” campaign, it is said. But nobody knows what that means. And moreover, in this type of affairs everything starts small as the plan is to achieve the expected results within days. Experience has shown that it never happens that way. One knows when it starts, but no one knows how it will move on. 

Kerry on Syria

US State Secretary John Kerry’s statement on Syria was an excellent piece of work. Brilliant, well thought through and properly grounded. It is also, in many ways, a seminal moment in terms of foreign policy doctrine. It will be often quoted in the future.

But, for now, it deserves, above all, unqualified support. 

Israel's intentions

As Israel announces that 1,200 new homes will be built in the occupied territories, it came to my mind that I have yet to meet a leader in Western Europe that believes in the new round of peace talks John Kerry has been pushing for. Everyone I talked to and every opinion I have read show that in this part of world the current government of Israel is perceived as not really interested in the talks. Moreover, there seems to be little patience left to deal with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

And, by the way, people have forgotten that there is one Mr Blair that is supposed to be doing something out there, as “Representative” of the Quartet. If you mention is name, the reaction is: “Oh, dear! I thought he had left”.

He might be the only European that does not give up the Israel-Palestine business!

Kerry's efforts

John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, has spent most of his time, during the last two weeks or so, trying to resuscitate the “final status negotiations” –that’s the official expression to name the talks between Israel and Palestine on border issues, security arrangements, and the fate of the Palestinian refugees.

Today it seems that his efforts are bearing fruit. We might see both countries back at the negotiating table, after five years of interruption and stalemate, next week. This is great news. I think it is important to recognize Kerry’s efforts.

And encourage him – and above all, President Obama – to continue along the same line, notwithstanding every bit of resistance Prime Minister Netanyahu will try to raise. At the end of the day, the key to very complex situation that defines the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is as much in Washington as it is in the region. 

The losing side

The true message that came out of today’s Friends of Syria meeting is that the many rebellions are losing the war. That’s the actual trend on the ground. New weapons for a divided, weakened opposition are just a way of effectively playing on Assad’s hand. He will have a justification to continue the military option, which has given him a new breath of life, and an excuse to postpone any negotiated solution. In the end, the Syrian population will be the real loser. 

No ambiguity this time

In the field of international affairs, ambiguity is a useful political tool. Some call it "constructive ambiguity". I advocate its use as often as possible. Smart leaders do not need to hear the full sentence to understand what is at stake. Furthermore, ambiguity allows for some face saving decisions. Ambiguity creates room for compromise.

But there is a time when the clarity of the message is essential. It serves as a serious warning.

John Kerry’s message to North Korea, during the last few days, when visiting China and Japan, was indeed very clear. And dead serious. The young man of Pyongyang has gone too far and should know that he will pay dearly if he crosses the line on the sand.

My impression is that Kerry’s notice has been received.