It’s too early to gauge the impact of last week’s Middle East peace summit in Annapolis, Md., on its intended goal: Israeli- Palestinian peace. But after the gathering, an emerging American approach to the region may end a crisis in Lebanon and weaken Iran’s influence.
Over the weekend, Syria’s favored candidate for the unfilled Lebanese presidency, Gen. Michel Suleiman, all but sealed the title. Lebanon’s anti-Syrian, U.S.-backed factions dropped their opposition to the general a day after Annapolis. Now, parliament is expected to vote for him on Friday.
Analysts say that the U-turn in Beirut can be traced to signals from the U.S. that it wants to reengage with Syria. They say Washington wants to deal with the country it has maligned as an agent for Iranian designs in the region, including the trafficking of weapons to anti-U.S./Israel militias in Lebanon and Iraq. …
Many Beirut politicians say the proposal to elect Suleiman, an army commander who took his post in 1998 when Syria controlled Lebanon, as president is the first reaction to a changing American stance toward Syria. …
Certainly, despite Syria’s attendance at Annapolis, U.S. officials are playing down the prospects of renewed dialogue with Damascus, insisting that Syria still needs to change its behavior first. Still, speculation of a deal was perhaps inevitable, given that Syria, scorned by the U.S. under the Bush administration as a state sponsor of terror, was invited to and chose to attend a conference hosted by President Bush. Access the full article>>
