Syria on my mind...













Madame Assad



Although you wouldn't know it by Washington's refusal to talk with Syria, the country is becoming increasingly important to U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. As Leon Hadar argues, the United States should realize that maintaining diplomatic ties with Syria could help Washington advance its interests on many fronts — including Iraq, Lebanon and peace with Israel (read the rest of American Realism and Engaging Syria.)

Also if you happen to be in DC this Friday:
I'll be speaking on Troop Withdrawal: Looking Beyond Iraq in a forum sponsored by the Independent Institute. I'll be discussing my A Diplomatic Road to Damascus: The Benefits of U.S. Engagement with Syria which will be published by the institute this month.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Yum.

We can certainly all get along, can't we?
12:57 AM
Anonymous said…
She's definately impressive. It's a pity she never does TV in the US.
1:42 PM
Anonymous said…
When you discuss Syria - elaborate on Petraeus concern about Department 2800 of the Lebanese Hezbollah. Is Syria involved with 2800?
1:47 PM
Leon Hadar said…
I don't know whether Syria is involved or not. If you read my paper, it's clear that I'm not a great fan of Assad and his regime, which have been involved in human rights violations and acts of terror (not unlike many of our allies in the Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia.
5:48 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide...
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna...
Read more