Security Council Resolution 1636 has spoken and Syria's President, Bashar al Assad has been put on notice - cooperate with the UN investigation into the death of former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri, or suffer the consequences. For the sake of the Lebanese people and justice, I wish that I could have confidence that the UN investigator Detlev Mehlis will be able to come up with firm evidence to prove beyond a doubt the Syrian role in the assassination of Hariri. But ever since I went to serve as a Foreign Service Officer in Damascus back in 1978, I have seen a history of vicious and self serving behavior on the part of the Syrian security apparatus, of its leadership among the Alouite Community, and of the relatives of the former President, Hafez al Assad. Why should now be any different?
I have my doubts that Mehlis will find a smoking gun. The Syrian internal security apparatus has had plenty of time to cook the books. Evidence has been destroyed and manufactured. Forged documents have been created in the basements of the security services. Witnesses have been “convinced” to perjure themselves. Others have disappeared. Interrogation of officials outside of Lebanon won't do any good while loved ones are still back in Damascus subject to torture or worse. We shouldn’t kid ourselves that Syrian intelligence will play by any rules other than their own.
Bashar al Assad has repeatedly asserted his innocence. Let us let him prove it. The Security Council has sent Mehlis back to Syria with a strengthened mandate. He needs to carry the investigation to its ultimate conclusion regardless of the consequences. But the burden of proof must be on Syria. This is not a case where innocent until proven guilty can apply. This is not a case for “beyond a reasonable doubt” makes sense. We are dealing with presumed state sponsored terrorism. The rules should be different. Let Bashar convince us and prove to the international community that his hands are not awash in blood.
This is what we should demand, but it is unlikely that we will demand that standard of proof. Syria will instead follow its time honored policy of giving just enough to deflect or diffuse the crises. They will play with the evidence to give the Russians and Chinese an excuse to vote against sanctions in the Security Council. They will call for international inspection of their border with Iraq. They will expel the Palestinian terrorist organizations from Damascus (once again) and we will find out later that they have take up residence in Allepo.
And these moves will probably be enough to dull the blade of retribution for Rafiq Hariri’s murder. After all, few in the Bush Administration want to take a chance on destabilizing the Assad regime and throwing the dice that a fundamentalist replacement will not emerge. The Iraq border may be a concern now, but it would be nothing compared to an Iraq border controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood sitting astride Syria’s armed forces and intelligence apparatus. And certainly the Israelis do not look fondly on chaos or fundamentalism in Damascus as a breeding and training ground for Jihadist terrorists throughout the region and particularly among the Palestinians.
As I say, it is likely that the increasingly pragmatic Bush administration will welcome a partial solution that answers some of its problems with Syria even though justice in the Hariri case is not served. It is also likely that the international community will be complicit. Perhaps it is only wishful thinking that the international community might stand on principle and live up to the values of integrity and justice. In the meantime, the losers will be the people of Lebanon and Syria. And the real losers will be all of the rest of us.
Comments