Ambassador Edward Djerejian, a connoisseur of the Middle East. Photo Sylviane Zehil
Edward P. Djerejian, former U.S. ambassador to Syria and Israel, and current director and founder of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, a world-renowned think tank, agrees without blinking. “Basically we have to do everything we can to avoid war in the region; focus on counterterrorism, build our capacity to confront asymmetric threats, promote dialogue between Iran and its neighbors, between Iran and the United States, and reintroduce the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action," he said in an interview with Orient-Le Jour, in New York.
What are the consequences for Lebanon? "The assassination of Soleimani will make Hezbollah more prudent in Lebanon. Hezbollah is probably the most important political party in Lebanon today, and Hassan Nasrallah is perhaps the most effective political leader in the country. He will now have to think not only twice but three times before doing anything! Being a political survivor, he will act in a very careful and deliberate manner. If he does not, he will have to pay a high price. But it also seems that his political influence in Lebanon is no longer as strong as it used to be," said the former ambassador, who has a perfect knowledge of the region. The diplomat also noted the "interesting speech" that Hassan Nasrallah gave a few days after the assassination, adding that individuals, citizens, as well as American organizations and journalists will not be targeted. Only the American military are a legitimate target. It is a clear signal that he should worry about reprisals,” he said.
“The Israelis, on the other hand, have made it clear that they are not involved in this crisis. It is a crisis between Iran and the United States. They have drawn up an emergency plan necessary to deal with any possibility of military action at the northern border of Israel caused by Hezbollah, which holds long-range missiles, and avert other incidents on the Syrian border at the Golan Heights eventually fomented by the Iranians and the Syrians," he said.
The “thawra”: historically very important
A little parenthesis about the "thawra," or “revolution,” that the former ambassador considers "historically very important. As in Iraq, spontaneous multi-confessional protests spread across Lebanon with the slogan “Kefaya, Enough!” against systemic corruption and against the government. These young people are standing up against the system itself and against any foreign interference in Lebanon. Will these protests lead to constructive results?” he asks.
Avoid war
"The assassination of Kassem Soleimani raises two fundamental political questions: will it strengthen deterrence in the region, more particularly in Iranian-American relations, or will it be a destabilizing force? Only future actions on the part of Iran and American actors will have the answer, he believes. In its approach to the Middle East, the United States should aim to avoid war. Because we know that waging a major war in the region would not benefit any of the parties, neither Iran, the United States, the Arab countries, nor Israel. Once a war is started, you don't know what the consequences will be,” he notes, referring to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 and its serious consequences, "with the creation and the emergence of the Islamic State led by former Iraqi soldiers and Baath party leaders who had been disenfranchised.” I don't think the decision makers in the George W. Bush administration had anticipated these types of consequences. I give it as an example to say that neither the United States, Iran, nor the parties of the region should seek war," said the former diplomat.
Edward Djerejian notes that during the attack on Saudi oil sites in September, President Trump made a statement specifying that it was not the United States that had been attacked, but that the target was indeed Saudi Arabia. "This is a clear message that shows that his priority is the American national interest as an essential foundation of American policy," he notes. This attack had a major effect on the Arab gulf countries. All parties demonstrated restraint. Because a war would have serious repercussions for all the national economies and interests of the countries involved,” he adds.
Iranian influence
Edward Djerejian also refutes the concept of the so-called Shiite land bridge connecting Tehran to Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and beyond including Sanaa. "Because the basic demographic reality is that the Sunnis represent 85% of the Muslim world and the Shiites 15%. The Iranians have managed to extend their political influence, but it remains limited by the geopolitics of demography. Therefore, one cannot simply assume that the Middle East will be predominantly under Shi'a influence. You have to put things in perspective,” he said.
How to deal with the real problem of the influence of the Iranian regime in these countries? "Iraq is very important to Iran, much more important than Syria, Lebanon and Yemen," he said. Because we must not forget that the war between Iran and Iraq (1980-1988) caused a million victims. It was a critical catalyst for both the Iranians and the Iraqis. Iran will do everything it can to prevent a hostile regime from coming to power in Iraq. It is important to take into account these fundamental factors in determining how to avoid future wars, and to work toward the future stability of the region as a whole."
U.S. presence: "We are there"
Is this the end of the American presence in the region? "I don't think we should rush out. I am also against these endless wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. But the way of a withdrawal must be well established," asserts the ex-American ambassador, while recalling that American military manpower amounts to approximately 60,000 soldiers in the area of the greater Middle East, including in Incirlik (Turkey), the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, the Fifth Fleet, headquartered in Bahrain, that ensures the free movement of the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean. "To speak of an American presence that is dissipating in the Middle East is not serious. We are there. But how to use this force in an intelligent way as the backdrop to U.S. diplomacy that could lead to a de-escalation and regional stability, as advocated by the U.N. secretary general? That is the question.
At this point, what is the strategy for the United States? “First, we should do everything we can to avoid a general war in the region; second, we should focus on counterterrorism and our capacity to avert asymmetric threats; third, promote dialogue between Iran and neighboring countries and between Iran and the United States. We should reintroduce the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to determine how it can be improved, which will bring together P5 + 1 and will incentivize the Iranians to avoid sanctions if they comply with JCPOA expansion agreements; and, finally, let us not forget, we should refocus our efforts on the Israeli-Palestinian question. This should all be part of a renewed U.S. strategy,” concludes Edward Djerejian.
(This article was originally published in French in L'Orient-Le Jour on the 10th of January)
