Obama ready to accommodate in Syria problem

WASHINGTON

 The Obama administration wants Iran to support a new political set-up in Syria, which could include some elements of the current Syrian governments, aides say.

President Barack Obama’s “aides are suggesting that Iran could also support a new attempt to reach a political settlement in Syria — one that would leave at least part of the current, Iranian-backed regime in place,” writes Jackson Diehl, a deputy editor at The Washington Post.

Other media outlets reported on Monday that President Obama had linked support for a new set-up in Syria to a nuclear deal with Iran.

According to these reports, in his second secret letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, sent in mid-October, President Obama emphasised “a shared interest in fighting Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria”.

The Wall Street Journal, which published excerpts from the letter late last week, reported that President Obama would accommodate Iran’s interests in a future deal in Syria only if Iran reached “a comprehensive agreement with global powers on the future of Tehran’s nuclear programme” by Nov 24.

The five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, who are negotiating a possible nuclear deal with Iran, have set a Nov 24 deadline for reaching an agreement.

But in an interview to CBS on Sunday evening, President Obama indicated that he was more interested in ensuring that “Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons” than in meeting the deadline.

The president also clarified that he had informed the Iranians — “publicly and through back channels” — that they should not expect any concession on the nuclear deal in return for their support to the fight against the Islamic State militants.

The Washington Post, however, noted that President Obama was “doubling down on a bet that his Iran strategy will yield a spectacular payoff”.

The newspaper pointed out that the proposed nuclear deal with Iran “restrains but does not eliminate Tehran’s ability to produce a weapon for a decade or so”.

The Post also reported that senior Obama administration officials viewed the nuclear deal “in the context of a larger effort to stabilise the shattered Middle East with Iran’s cooperation”.Diplomatic observers in Washington say that such moves indicate the Obama administration’s desire to completely redo America’s traditional Middle East policy.

“So far, the United States has depended on a coalition of Arab states to contain Iran,” said a Washington-based diplomatic observer. “But now the administration wants to use Iran to contain the growing influence of religious extremists in the Arab world.”

The planned move has alarmed the Republicans, who now control both chambers of the US Congress and have pledged to prevent President Obama from implementing his strategy.

“The consequences of this ill-conceived bargain would destroy the Syrians’ last, best chance to live in freedom from the brutal Assad regime,” said two senior Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

They rejected a suggestion that Iran was helping the Americans fight extremists in Iraq and could also help forge a peace deal in Syria.CNN pointed out that in the new Congress, Senator McCain would head the powerful Armed Service Committee of the US Senate and could use his influence to make it difficult for President Obama to execute his plans.

Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, would head another key Senate body, the Foreign Relations Committee. Last year, he urged the administration to launch a military strike in Syria to unseat President Assad and would oppose any move to accommodate the current Syrian government in a future political arrangement.