The Aftermath of Pelosi's Diplomacy

[JaJae]

We all remember Pelosi's visit to Syria and her "botched" message she demanded to send even after first being asked by Israel to keep her mouth shut. There was a media heyday over that.

The Washington Post wrote an editorial shortly after her visit describing immediate results of her visit.
Pratfall in Damascus - washingtonpost.com

This just about sums up the initial reaction from her visit:

"What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel," said a statement quickly issued by the prime minister's office. In fact, Mr. Olmert told Ms. Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel." In other words, Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda.

Her trip didn't make her look good. It showed just how naive she is when it comes to foreign policy and diplomacy. It is also why Bush told her he didn't want her to go.

The short term effects of her visit weren't quite known at this point. But, shortly after her trip was scrutinized. Unfortunately the mainstream media didn't run with this story.
No Results in Damascus - washingtonpost.com

Nancy Pelosi claimed this of her visit:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was particularly unstinting in her goodwill, declaring that she had come to see Mr. Assad "in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace." In a statement, her delegation reported that it had talked to Mr. Assad about stopping the flow of foreign terrorists to Iraq and about obtaining the release of kidnapped Israeli soldiers. It also said it had "conveyed our strong interest in the cases of [Syrian] democracy activists," such as imprisoned human rights lawyer Anwar al-Bunni.

The actual results were much different.

Mr. al-Bunni might offer the best answer -- if he could. On Tuesday, one of Mr. Assad's judges sentenced him to five years in prison. His "crimes" were to speak out about the torture and persecution of regime opponents, to found the Syrian Human Rights Association and to sign the "Damascus Declaration," a pro-democracy manifesto.

By condemning Mr. al-Bunni to prison, Mr. Assad was delivering a distinct message to Syria's would-be liberal reformers and those who support them: There will be no change on his watch. The same message came in the parliamentary "elections" that the regime staged on Sunday and Monday. No independent candidates were permitted; a predetermined number of winners from the official party ensured that the parliament will remain a rubber stamp.

What of the other items on the U.S. congressional agenda? Well, there has been a major surge in suicide bombings in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq this month, in what U.S. commanders describe as an attempt by al-Qaeda to defeat the new security operation in the capital. According to U.S. and Iraqi officials, almost all suicide bombers in Iraq are foreigners, and some 80 percent of them pass through Syria. The border remains as porous as ever.

Meanwhile the military wing of Hamas, whose headquarters is in Damascus, launched a barrage of rockets and mortar rounds at Israel from Gaza on Tuesday. Israeli officials said the attack appeared aimed at creating a diversion that would allow Hamas to capture more Israeli soldiers. If so, the operation failed -- but none of the hostages Ms. Pelosi said she spoke to Mr. Assad about have been released.

In other words, in the short term nothing good came from her visit to Syria. If anything it may have caused more problems.

Now the New York Observer has done a long term evaluation of Pelosi's visit. Their result:
After Pelosi’s Syria Visit, Dissidents Cower
The House Speaker may have handed the government a license to crush
After Pelosi’s Syria Visit, Dissidents Cower | The New York Observer

And, perverse as it may seem to some American liberals, it is the Syrians who are most sympathetic to their progressive values who have been most critical of Ms. Pelosi’s attempts to begin a dialogue with Syria’s government.

Many Syrian dissidents and pro-democracy activists have privately expressed dismay at Ms. Pelosi’s message of friendship to the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. They say that Ms. Pelosi’s visit, no matter how well-intentioned, has effectively pulled the rug out from under them, critically damaging their efforts to create momentum for reform from within.

“Pelosi’s visit made the regime feel that Americans were divided on how to deal with Syria,” said a Damascus-based women’s-rights activist who, like five other activists interviewed for this article, asked that his name be withheld because he feared punishment. “This sends a message to the regime that the pressure is off, that it can do what it likes.”

t has certainly seemed that way in the weeks since Ms. Pelosi’s departure, during which time the government has imprisoned Kurdish opposition figures while maintaining travel and work bans on political activists.

In the eastern Syrian town of Raqqa, hundreds of people were arrested for protesting rigged parliamentary elections. And over the last month, the Syrian courts have embarked on a veritable spree of sentencing, handing down harsh prison sentences to some of Syria’s most prominent pro-democracy activists.

Last week, the physician and dissident Kamal Labwani was sentenced to 12 years in prison for having met with American officials during a 2005 trip to Washington. This past weekend, the activists Michel Kilo and Mahmoud Issa were sentenced to three years each for having signed the so-called Damascus Declaration, a document petitioning Syria’s government to normalize relations with neighboring Lebanon.

The few Syrian activists who are not presently behind bars say they have all but ceased working.

“Most of us are just sitting and waiting,” said the women’s-rights activist. “It’s too dangerous to try any political activities right now. The regime is making a point, and there’s no telling when the current crackdown will end.”

Even Syrians outside the inner circle of activists seem shaken by the conviction, shortly after Ms. Pelosi’s return to Washington, of Syria’s best-known human-rights lawyer, Anwar al-Bunni. Mr. al-Bunni was convicted of “spreading information that could weaken national morale” and “joining an international organization without proper authorization,” for which he was given a five-year prison sentence.

Mr. al-Bunni is a slight, nervous-looking man, a tireless polymath who, aside from his work defending scores of political prisoners, has helped to found a center offering training in human rights, and has drafted a new constitution for Syria. Last year, he invited a handful of foreign reporters to his home to show them his proposed new constitution, and waved his hands excitedly as he outlined his ideas about what a democratic transition in Syria might look like, how potential power-sharing arguments among Syria’s many ethnic and religious groups could be anticipated and solved.

But Syria’s would-be Thomas Jefferson is in the infamous Adra prison now, and he is known to have been tortured.

Very good job Pelosi. You effectively managed to get done every horrible notion the right claimed would happen due to her trip. Syria and the middle east would have been better if she had just stayed home. Yet she still considers her trip to Syria a success. I said from the start nothing good come come from her visit and didn't think she should go. She effectively shut down any Democratic process in Syria and brought the country two steps back as well as undermining the stance America has on Syria showing them we're weak and they can do whatever they want.

[kinggovernor]

useful idiots can be easily exploited

[Thorgrim]

Ahaha, oh that's a good one

Just like we support Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc...all as they engage in torture and repression of political opposition, in fact, we help them by sending the CIA to their countries with people we want tortured

On torture and political repression, the US says to Syria what it says to all its allies "uhm...if you could stop, that'd be great...oh you won't...well...think about it"

"democratic process in Syria" haha you really think that's the US's plan for Syria, for a democratic government to take over?

They simply wish for a military coup, and for some thug like Mubarak (our very close ally) to take over and keep repressing democracy because of radical shia and sunni elements inside Syria are too volatile for any sort of Democracy, especially at this time

However, the chances of a non-Assad taking such a position are too remote, and that person would be isolated and not have the power and influence Mubarak does...thus, the US does not in any way try to overthrow the Syrian government, unlike how we handle the Iranians...which we do have set programs to try and destablize the regime and hope for a coup

I do see one point you highlighted, the 80% go through Syria...well duh, the border is ridiculously huge, unmanagable for a country that still doesn't have peace with Israel and has a volatile Lebanese government next door (it's unlikely that even if those problems were solved it could "seal the border" and they'd all be going through Turkey or Saudi Arabia, but that path leads through Kurdish and Shia militia land, which is very dangerous for Sunni terrorists, and Iran has mostly the same problem except for a small strip, but even then they'd have to deal with Shia revolutionary guards, who hate Sunni terrorists (they helped us take out al qaeda after 9/11)

Regardless of who or what ran Syria, its the obvious choice to cross as it goes right into Anbar, the heart of the Sunni insurgency

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I do see one point you highlighted, the 80% go through Syria...well duh,

Well duh, the point was that there was no change or even attempt to prevent militants from coming in to kill our troops.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Well duh, the point was that there was no change or even attempt to prevent militants from coming in to kill our troops.

The border is HUGE and it's the most direct route to the insurgency, people will get through...is there any proof the Syrian military could be doing something SPECIFIC that is REASONABLE that it's not doing?

The US could always seal their side of the border, but they know it's an impossible task, yet Syria, which has to deal with Lebanon and Israel, is supposed to do it, just out of the kindness of their heart...after doing torture work for Bush only to be kicked to the curb by Bush

[Thorgrim]

Question: When was the last time the Syrians and US met to discuss the border military cooperation?


Answer: Extensive Tripartite border security conversations were held in September 2004. Since that time, our Embassy in Damascus has maintained an ongoing dialogue with Syria about what actions must be taken to prevent the use of Syrian territory by those supporting the Iraqi insurgency.

Syria-Iraq Border (Taken Question)

So, there goes your idea about "no attempt"

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

So, there goes your idea about "no attempt"

How is this a response to what I said?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

The border is HUGE and it's the most direct route to the insurgency, people will get through...is there any proof the Syrian military could be doing something SPECIFIC that is REASONABLE that it's not doing?

The US could always seal their side of the border, but they know it's an impossible task, yet Syria, which has to deal with Lebanon and Israel, is supposed to do it, just out of the kindness of their heart...after doing torture work for Bush only to be kicked to the curb by Bush

First of all I'm defending Pelosi's argument here. I don't think she should have went to Syria and did what she did. I'm arguing against what she did. There's a difference. It sounds like you think Pelosi's trip to Syria and her requests were equally as ridiculous as I did. Looks like we agree when we lose focus on what we're debating

[JaJae]

To clarify the argument being made is that Pelosi went to Syria to try to accomplish this, this and this... etc (including making friends and trying to convince Syria to secure the border to Iraq). The end result is that none of what she hoped to accomplish actually happened or worked. In fact, in many cases the exact opposite happened and she made the situation worse. Democratic activist leaders are being jailed and tortured, women's rights groups and Democratic activists are being silenced and fearful to speak out, and Syria is taking steps backwards from democracy due to their newfound weakness in America.

Her trip to Syria was counter-productive and only did harm. I'm not going to sit here and defend why she failed, I knew she was going to fail before she left. She is not a diplomat, she is extremely naive and she was self-serving in her visit to Syria. Put together, it was a recipe for disaster. And we have now seen the final result.

[Thorgrim]

Uhm...Pelosi was repeating the WH talking points on Syria, because as the US we generally speak with one voice in these matters, and then Rice visited with Syrian officials to again afterwards to repeat Pelosi's line on terrorism/whatever

The Israeli comments have had no negative effect, nor will they

The only negative effect I can see is your claim that by visiting, she gave Syria room to crack down...which I said is silly, everyone of his neighbors do what he is doing and no matter what the US does, even if Bush showed up for a formal state dinner, he'd still crack down

We should be thankful to Assad, rather than harboring terrorist armies like Lebanon and Israel-Palestine, there is no such force in Syria, they merely pass through their huge border that would be impossible to seal, and as shown, they have worked with the US "extensively" according to our government, on the border

Assad and Mubarak are both not "good guys" but killing/getting rid of either of them would be insanely stupid, and those "progressives" are just trying to get international support by throwing everything they can up in the air, just like "progressives" in Egypt do

This basic repeat of an attack on Pelosi is again, baseless

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Uhm...Pelosi was repeating the WH talking points on Syria, because as the US we generally speak with one voice in these matters, and then Rice visited with Syrian officials to again afterwards to repeat Pelosi's line on terrorism/whatever

Which talking points was that she was following? Was it the part where we don't negotiate and do exactly the things she did? She is not a diplomat. It wasn't her place to attempt to interpret messages from Bush she wasn't given or messages from Israel she wasn't given in a self-serving photo-op that led to more instability in the middle east... which is exactly what the diplomats told her would happen if she went.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

To clarify the argument being made is that Pelosi went to Syria to try to accomplish this, this and this... etc (including making friends and trying to convince Syria to secure the border to Iraq).

She repeated WH talking points, she did not go there to solve the border crisis...in a POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT, Assad went on US TELEVISION to talk about the border problems, talking in fluent english about the situation...that's progress to me, give a gold star to Pelosi

The end result is that none of what she hoped to accomplish actually happened or worked. In fact, in many cases the exact opposite happened and she made the situation worse. Democratic activist leaders are being jailed and tortured, women's rights groups and Democratic activists are being silenced and fearful to speak out, and Syria is taking steps backwards from democracy due to their newfound weakness in America.

No, there are no steps backward, this is status-quo

Her trip to Syria was counter-productive and only did harm. I'm not going to sit here and defend why she failed, I knew she was going to fail before she left. She is not a diplomat, she is extremely naive and she was self-serving in her visit to Syria. Put together, it was a recipe for disaster. And we have now seen the final result.

There was no disaster, there is no "final result", I've already dealt with your claims

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by JaJae

To clarify the argument being made is that Pelosi went to Syria to try to accomplish this, this and this... etc (including making friends and trying to convince Syria to secure the border to Iraq). The end result is that none of what she hoped to accomplish actually happened or worked. In fact, in many cases the exact opposite happened and she made the situation worse. Democratic activist leaders are being jailed and tortured, women's rights groups and Democratic activists are being silenced and fearful to speak out, and Syria is taking steps backwards from democracy due to their newfound weakness in America.

Her trip to Syria was counter-productive and only did harm. I'm not going to sit here and defend why she failed, I knew she was going to fail before she left. She is not a diplomat, she is extremely naive and she was self-serving in her visit to Syria. Put together, it was a recipe for disaster. And we have now seen the final result.

It wasn't "counter-productive" it was "useless" just like every other envoy we send there.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

She repeated WH talking points, she did not go there to solve the border crisis...in a POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT, Assad went on US TELEVISION to talk about the border problems, talking in fluent english about the situation...that's progress to me, give a gold star to Pelosi



No, there are no steps backward, this is status-quo



There was no disaster, there is no "final result", I've already dealt with your claims

Wow. Just wow.

The news story says it all. She was thinking that she could "talk" to people and turn them from good to bad. It's a liberal mindset that just doesn't work in the real world.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

It wasn't "counter-productive" it was "useless" just like every other envoy we send there.

Useless is a good word.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

It wasn't "counter-productive" it was "useless" just like every other envoy we send there.

You can negotiate with them 200 times, buy them off with money, food, supply. Soon as they use up the aid they start fighting again.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Wow. Just wow.

The news story says it all. She was thinking that she could "talk" to people and turn them from good to bad. It's a liberal mindset that just doesn't work in the real world.

Yeah, and Baker thought he was going to turn Assad's father into a good person when they were discussing the 91 gulf war

As Ron Paul said, talking to your "enemies" (in the past, real enemies) is a conservative republican value, unless you want to call Ike and Nixon "liberals"...ever since WW2 we've done that, and it helped us win the cold war...that "mindset" is one that works

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

You can negotiate with them 200 times, buy them off with money, food, supply. Soon as they use up the aid they start fighting again.

I'm sure you and Donkey thought talking to Iran and Syria after 9/11 was useless, yet both countries gave enormous aid to help us take out Al-Qaeda, Iran specifically intervened in Afghanistan to help us

Talk to any Chinese diplomat in the 1970s, the conversation was how communism would control the world and any attempt to stop it was fascist...if that's not calling someone your enemy, I don't know what is

Yet Nixon went there and we're still reaping the benefits of an open dialogue with China