Marquadt-Bigman - Quote of the day

Petra Marquadt-Bigman..
The Warped Mirror..
02 March '12..

Let us pause here in front of this state of [Assad’s] mad dictatorship, and compare it with what Israel has committed against us [i.e. the Arabs] in recent times […] particularly the Lebanon and Gaza wars. The entire world rushes to stop Israel’s aggressions against Lebanon in 2006, and this war ended after approximately two months, claiming the lives of 1,200 Lebanese. The same thing applies to the Gaza war, which had approximately the same death toll. In both wars, the public opinion in the Arab world rushed to take action, whilst counterfeit “friends of Israel” lists were issued, masterminded by the al-Assad regime; indeed a number of Arab politicians attempted to exploit this tragedy, most prominently the al-Assad regime. However we did not hear anybody ask – even now – why did these wars happen? Whose interests did these wars, and more, serve? Who was responsible for this?

CAMERA - Atlantic Year in Photos Distorts Syrian Casualties

TS
CAMERA/Snapshots
08 December '11

http://blog.camera.org/archives/2011/12/atlantic_year_in_photos_distor_1.html

The Atlantic's 2011: Year in Photos includes the following photo and caption:

Palestinian protesters infiltrate the Israel-Syria border on May 15, 2011, near the Druze village of Majdal Shams, Israel. Reportedly at least 12 were killed and several injured when IDF soldiers open fired on protesters attempting to cross the Syria-Israel border adjacent to Majdal Shams in Northern Israel. (Jalaa Marey/JINI/Getty Images)

Four infiltrators, not 12, were killed after crossing the fence dividing Syrian and Israel. See, for example, the New York Times and Al Jazeera. The Atlantic's error is apparently the result of sloppy editing in an effort to shorten the original caption from Getty Images, which more accurately stated:

Syrian protesters climb the border fence between Syria and Israel during a demonstration marking "nakba" near the northern Druze village of Majdal Shams in the Golan Heights May 15, 2011. Israeli troops shot at Palestinian protesters on its frontiers with Syria, Lebanon and Gaza on Sunday, killing nine who were marking what they term "the catastrophe" of Israel's founding in 1948.

Unfortunately, in 2011, there's no need to falsely inflate fatalities among Syrian protesters. In total, more than 4,000 were reportedly killed. Not by Israel, but by Assad's own forces. While the Atlantic chose to include a photo representing the killing of four Syrian protesters at the hands of Israeli forces, it does not include a single image representing the many thousands of Syrian civilians killed by their own repressive regime.


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Fresnozionism - The best response to anti-Israel propaganda

Fresnozionism.org
05 October '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/10/the-best-response-to-anti-israel-propaganda/

A cornered beast speaks:

“If a crazy measure is taken against Damascus, I will need not more than 6 hours to transfer hundreds of rockets and missiles to the Golan Heights to fire them at Tel Aviv,” [Syrian President Bashar] Assad said after [Turkish FM] Davutoglu conveyed the United States’ warning message to him.

He also reiterated that Damascus will also call on Hezbollah in Lebanon to launch such an intensive rocket and missile attack on Israel that the Israeli spy agencies could never imagine.

“All these events will happen in three hours, but in the second three hours, Iran will attack the US warships in the Persian Gulf and the US and European interests will be targeted simultaneously,” Assad said. — FARS News Service, Iran

Israel is reported to have warned Assad earlier this year that if he attacked Israel, it would respond by personally targeting him. This is an appropriate response to a gangster. Israel certainly has no interest in killing (other) Syrians, who are not responsible for wild beast Assad’s actions.

I mention this threat to make a point that I’ve made before, but that bears repeating by everyone who tries to explain the Israeli-Arab conflict:

It is not primarily about the Palestinian Arabs, although they often represent the violent interface of it. The overall problem facing Israel is that the Arab world, plus Iran and now Turkey, wants to destroy Israel. One of their greatest weapons, in the war on the ground, in the information war and in the diplomatic war — all three are being waged simultaneously — is the Palestinian Arabs. But it isn’t about them, any more than what used to be called ‘the war on terrorism’ was about terrorism.

Ahmadinejad adds more sparks to Lebanon tinderbox

Elder of Ziyon
03 October '10

Things in Lebanon are heating up as the planned visit of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad approaches. Apparently, even Syria is nervous.

From Ya Libnan (h/t Samson):

Kuwaiti newspaper al-Anbaa quoted diplomatic sources as saying that Ahmadinejad’s scheduled visit to Lebanon around mid-October was brought up during the recent summit with Assad in Damascus.

The sources said Assad asked Ahmadinejad why he wanted to visit Lebanon .The Iranian President has reportedly told Assad that the visit was “significant due to the strategic importance of the southern Lebanon .”

Ahmadinejad has also reportedly told Assad, according to the sources, that he viewed the entire area of southern Lebanon as Iran’s border with Israel.

At this point, the sources said, Assad advised that Ahmadinejad’s visit should not take place at this time.

Assad, however, also hoped in the event Ahmadinejad went ahead of his visit to tone down his statements during during his visit since Lebanon’s security was very important to Syria’s security interests.

Al-Anbaa said that Ahmadinejad promised Assad at the end of their meeting to “seriously consider” the Syrian president’s recommendations.

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

How's that outreach to Syria going, President Obama?

Elder of Ziyon
03 October '10

From AP:

The Obama administration is pressing Syria to resume long–stalled peace talks with Israel as part of its push for broad settlement between Arab countries and the Jewish state.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met on Monday in New York with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al–Moallem to make the case for negotiations. The State Department said Clinton was the first secretary of state to meet Syria's top diplomat in three years, although special Mideast envoy George Mitchell has made several visits to Syria in the past year.

Including two weeks ago.

So how well has this diplomatic push worked on Syria?

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Reactivating the Syrian track

Tony Badran
NOW Lebanon
23 September '10

Last week, US officials came out with statements assuring that the Obama administration is committed to achieving “comprehensive peace,” which means at some point reactivating the Syrian track (and presumably the Lebanese one as well). However, there are questions regarding the prospects for such talks, and the assumptions behind them are equally shaky, fraught with problems and potential traps.

The statements came during a visit to Damascus by Special Envoy George Mitchell, barely two weeks after the resumption of direct talks on the Palestinian track. After meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Mitchell laid down the administration’s line that the “effort to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in no way contradicts or conflicts with our goal of comprehensive peace, including peace between Israel and Syria.” However, he added, the foundation that supports this “comprehensive peace” was “good faith” negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis, which had to be established first. Absent that, “anything that we would try to build with others in the region would not stand.”

The idea, therefore, seems to be to protect the fragile Palestinian track from outside sabotage by elements known for their spoiler role, namely Syria. This was made explicit by an anonymous US official who told the Christian Science Monitor: “If Hamas succeeds [in scuttling the talks], the prospects for eventual Syria-Israel talks are zero.”

This was not the first time that such a demand was made of the Syrians. When the Arab League follow-up committee met to support a Palestinian return to direct talks, the Syrians were asked to go along, but they have consistently refused to do so.

(Read full story)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Guardian marks ten years of Bashar al-Assad's regime

Just Journalism
16 July '10


This weekend sees the 10 year anniversary of Bashar al-Assad coming to power in Syria, succeeding his father Hafez. To mark a decade of his rule, Human Rights Watch published ‘A Wasted Decade’, a report focusing on the lack of improvement in Syria’s poor human rights record. The Guardian’s Middle East editor, Ian Black, covered the report in ‘Syrian human rights record unchanged under Assad, report says’, an article that detailed Syria’s multiple violations of its citizens' rights, from arbitrary arrests, to the striking absence of freedom of speech.

However, there was a marked difference in tone and content between this article, and Ian Black’s comment piece on the same topic from Wednesday. ‘Syria is yet to play its cards’ was notably uncritical of the regime and played down Assad’s dictatorial credentials, preferring instead to concentrate on superficial signs of progress.

From the outset, ‘Syria is yet to play its cards’ sought to draw a contrast between the rule of Bashar al-Assad and his father, Hafez al-Assad. Yet the article does not clarify exactly what the distinction is between the two leaders, and barely discusses their respective human rights records. Arguing that Bashar is ‘less enigmatic’ than his father, Black limits his account of Hafez to noting that his nickname was ‘the sphinx of Damascus’, and to describing him as ‘a hard act to follow in a famously tough neighbourhood’. The approving tone of this brief assessment is interesting given that Hafez is perhaps best known for the overseeing the massacre at Hama, where for 4 weeks the Syrian army bombarded the town, resulting in, according to Amnesty International, between 10,000 and 25,000 deaths.

Black portrays Syria as having progressed under its current leader, stating that he has ‘gone a fair way in modernising the country after years of isolation.’ However, it soon becomes clear that ‘modernisation’ in the context of Syria refers solely to economic and financial improvements, rather than liberalisation and democratisation.

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Pardon Me, Obama Administration, But Isn't Your Policy on Fire?

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
05 March '10

Posted before Shabbat

The story of the U.S. engagement with Syria and the sanctions issue regarding Iran’s nuclear program are fascinating. Each day there’s some new development showing how the Obama Administration is acting like a deer standing in the middle of a busy highway admiring the pretty headlights of the automobiles.

It’s like watching the monster sneak up behind someone. Even though you know he won’t turn around, you can’t help but watch in fascinated horror and yell: “Look out!” But he pays no attention.

The story of the U.S. engagement with Syria and the sanctions issue regarding Iran’s nuclear program are fascinating. Every day there is some new development which shows how the Obama Administration is acting like a deer standing in the middle of a busy highway admiring the pretty headlights of the automobiles.

Or to put it a different way, it is like watching the monster sneak up behind someone. Even though you know he’s not going to turn around, you can’t help but watch in fascinated horror and yelling out: “Look out!” But he pays no attention.

So I’m not just writing about these two issues in isolation but as very appropriate symbols of everything wrong with Western perceptions of the Middle East (and everywhere else) and the debates over foreign policy (and everything else) nowadays.

(Read full article)
.

Dinner in Damascus: What Did Iran Ask of Hizballah?

David Schenker/Matthew Levitt
Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Policy Watch #1637
02 March '10

On February 26, Syrian president Bashar al-Asad hosted Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad and Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah for a dinner in Damascus. Nasrallah is a routine guest in the capital, but the timing of this high-profile trip -- just a week after the United States dispatched Undersecretary of State William Burns to Damascus and nominated its first new ambassador in five years -- seemed calculated not only to irritate Washington, but also to highlight the central role Hizballah plays in Iran and Syria's strategic planning. Apart from serving as a pivot between Tehran and Damascus, however, the group also holds the power to engulf Lebanon and perhaps the entire region into another war through actions of its own.

Unfulfilled Promise of Retaliation

Two years after Hizballah military commander Imad Mughniyah was assassinated in Damascus -- prompting Nasrallah to declare an "open war" on Israel, the presumed perpetrator -- the group has yet to successfully retaliate. But it is not for lack of trying: in 2008, two Hizballah operatives and several Azerbaijani nationals were convicted of plotting attacks against the Israeli and U.S. embassies in Baku and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. The same year, Turkish authorities foiled as many as six possible Hizballah terrorist plots targeting Israelis and possibly the local Jewish community. Iranian intelligence agents were reportedly helping the group establish a network of operatives posing as tourists.

(Read full article)
.

The Vision Thing

Emmanuel Navon
For The Sake Of Zion
03 March '10

The man whom George W. Bush used to dismissingly call “The Eye Doctor” seems to be doing fine without glasses. Bashar al-Assad, an ophthalmologist who inherited his father’s hereditary job only because his older brother was killed in a car accident, has turned the tables on the United States. Five years ago, he complied with the American injunction to pull his troops out of Lebanon. Today, he is publicly humiliating the United States.

In February 2005, the US withdrew its ambassador to Syria following the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. Assad’s involvement in Hariri’s murder was so obvious that former French President Jacques Chirac, a personal friend of Hariri (and long-term guest in his Paris apartment), has been boycotting Assad ever since. By recalling its ambassador, the US was also expressing its discontent with the fact that Syria hosts and shields Palestinian terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, transfers weapons from Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon, lets terrorists crossing into Iraq, supports Iran’s foreign policy goals, and cooperates with Iran and North Korea to develop nuclear capabilities (concerns about Syria’s suspected nuclear program were brought to the world’s attention by the Israeli bombing of an alleged nuclear facility in eastern Syria in 2007).

Last month, five years exactly after the scolding of the Bush Administration, President Obama nominated Robert Ford as the new US Ambassador to Syria. The rationale of the current US Administration is that Assad can be sweet-talked into trading his alliance with Iran for a deal with America. Obama’s gamble has produced immediate results, but not the expected ones. Shortly after the nomination of Ambassador Ford, Ahmadinejad paid an official and pompous visit to Damascus (where he also met with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah). Baffled, Hillary Clinton asked Assad why he was doing the opposite of what her government’s policy was supposed to produce. Assad responded as follows: “We have a hard time understanding Clinton, either because of a translation problem or because of our limited capabilities.” Hillary Clinton is being pushed around by Middle Eastern machos and America is being ridiculed.

(Read full post)
.

Don't expect progress from talking to Syria

Washington Post Editorial
19 February '10

THE NOTION that Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad can somehow be turned from his alliance with Iran and sponsorship of terrorism is one of the hardiest of the Middle East. No number of failed diplomatic initiatives, or outrages by Mr. Assad, seems to diminish its luster. The latest attempt to test it comes from the Obama administration, which this week nominated the first U.S. ambassador to Damascus since 2005 and dispatched a senior State Department official, William J. Burns, to meet with Mr. Assad. "I have no illusions," Mr. Burns said afterward, "but my meeting . . . made me hopeful we can make progress together."

We don't disagree with the administration's selection of an ambassador or Mr. Burns's visit; both represent a modest delivery on President Obama's campaign promise of "direct engagement" with regimes such as Syria. But it's worth noting that Mr. Burns has done this before: He met with Mr. Assad in 2004 on behalf of the Bush administration. Earlier, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell "engaged" Mr. Assad. So have House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John F. Kerry, and numerous European notables, including French President Nicolas Sarkozy. When he was Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert negotiated extensively with Mr. Assad through Turkish intermediaries.

(Read full editorial)
.

Syria Regains Pivotal Regional, Int'l Role – The Triumph of the 'Course of Resistance'

N. Mozes
MEMRI
28 January '10

In a December 29, 2009 speech to the Syrian parliament, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Mu'allem summed up the achievements of his country's political policy in 2009 by saying, "For Syria, 2009 was a year of political success in every sense of the term, and on all fronts..."[1] Indeed, the past year has seen a significant improvement in Syria's regional and international standing; it managed to extricate itself from its isolation internationally and in the Arab world, and to position itself as an influential regional force. By the end of 2009, the Syrian regime had become self-confident and certain of the effectiveness of its "path of resistance" policy, and was challenging the regional order and the world order and acting powerfully to change both.

The following is a review of Syria's current world view and policy, as reflected in statements by Syrian officials and articles in the Syrian government press.
Syria – From Isolation to Key Player in the International Arena
Until 2008, President Bashar Al-Assad's Syria seemed to be a pariah state. Syria had been isolated by the West and by some of the Arab countries, and was under international pressure that spiked following the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri; in the wake of the assassination, it was forced to withdraw its military from Lebanon.

The aggressive anti-Syria line was led by the Bush administration, which saw Syria as part of an "axis of evil" together with Iran and North Korea, and accused it of involvement in terrorism in Iraq. In 2004, the U.S. intensified its anti-Syrian sanctions, and worked in the U.N. Security Council for the passage of Resolution 1559 calling for Syria to withdraw its forces from Lebanon. In October 2008, the U.S. even bombed insurgents on Syrian territory who were suspected of operating from there against Iraq.

The assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri was a watershed in Syria's relationship with many countries in the West and in the Arab world, particularly France and Saudi Arabia, who had until then been its close allies. This change was evidently due to the close relationship that Al-Hariri had maintained with then-French president Jacques Chirac, and with the Saudi royal family. Evidence of the severing of relations and of the anger that the assassination evoked in Chirac was clear in an interview he gave in 2007 to the French daily Le Monde. He said: "There were times I used to speak with Bashar Al-Assad. I used to talk with his father [Hafez Al-Assad]. But to be honest, [Bashar and I] do not talk any more. It is he who caused [this halt to the dialogue]. I realized that there was no point [in dialogue]. It is hard to reconcile Bashar Al-Assad's regime with security and peace."[2]

In the Arab world, it was Saudi Arabia and Egypt that led the aggressive line against Syria, and there were even reports that it was they who were behind the establishment of the international tribunal to investigate the assassination.

(Read full report)
.

6 Reasons Why Emperor of Lebanon Aoun Met with Assad Twice

Alfred G.
Reform Party of Syria
14 December 09

Apparently, our president for life, met with General Michel Aoun of Lebanon twice behind closed doors in Damascus.

For those who have no clue why our president would meet twice with Aoun, this should enlighten you:

1) Aoun forgot to ask for directions back to his real home.

2) Aoun asked that Assad encourage Hezbollah to stage a coup while Suleiman is in Washington so that he can be Emperor of Lebanon. The second meeting was for Assad to explain to him why this is premature.

3) Assad's tailor had to re-measure because the earlier measurements did not make sense.

4) Aoun wanted to move the body of Majd al-Assad to Rabiya to remind the Lebanese who is really the boss in Lebanon.

5) Aoun forgot to kiss Assad's hand.

6) Aoun wanted to remind Assad that the last check paid by Qatar bounced.
.

Why is the West So Easily Fooled by Middle East Dictators? Case in Point: Syria's "Independent" Media is Owned by the Regime

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
13 December 09

It's remarkable how easy it is for Middle Eastern dictatorships to fool the West. Iran has been stringing along Europe and the United States for seven years on the pretense that it is ready to make a deal on its nuclear weapons' drive. The Palestinians persuade the West that they really do want to make peace but just need a better offer. And so on.

Sometimes the foolishness is due to ideology or bias, but ignorance is often a major factor. The assumption that Middle East dictatorships or Islamist revolutionaries really want to be moderate, that they're just victims and everything is the West's fault, or that a solution of conflicts is just a concession away overwhelms anything like a sense of history, research, or comprehension of what's going on.

Here’s an example, only one among hundreds. What makes it so symbollic is because it would have been so easy to get this story right. Since Bashar al-Asad inherited the family dictatorship eight years ago, there have been an endless stream of stories on how he is a really nice guy and just wants to be friends. Stories about the regime's sponsorship of terrorism and extremism--visible in every speech Bashar and his colleagues make in Arabic and all that appears in the Syrian state-controlled media--don't get much coverage. Neither does the fate of democratic dissidents.

Syria, of course, is a brutally repressive dictatorship where non-violent dissenters are consistently arrested, imprisoned, and tortured. It also sponsors terrorism in all directions, against Americans and Iraqis in Iraq; against Lebanon where it murdered about a dozen people in recent years including former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri; against Israel by sponsoring Hamas and Hizballah; and periodically against Jordan.

(Continue article)

Related: Guardian Hearts Mukhabarat Media
.

Syria Exports Trouble

How Bashar al-Assad is playing the world.

Michael Young
Commentary/Forbes
08 December 09
HT to RPS

Paris, July 14, 2008. On the podium of dignitaries at the bottom of the Champs Élysées one man savors the irony of the moment. He has been invited by President Nicolas Sarkozy to this celebration of Bastille Day, when France commemorates the opening shot in its revolution to end absolutism. Yet for the invitee, Syria's president Bashar al-Assad, this is a consecration, the first major sign that his regime's isolation is about to end, and that his brand of absolutist rule is getting stronger.

After the assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafiq al-Hariri, in February 2005, Syria, the only credible suspect in the crime, found itself accused and was forced to withdraw its army from Lebanon. Its subsequent rapprochement with Iran widened the rift between Damascus and two major Arab states, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. But within three years, Sarkozy, who hoped his efforts would earn France a greater role in the Levant, became the first major Western state to reverse that trend. Assad had surrendered nothing to warrant the embrace.

This has become a Syrian habit. Assad has been getting away with murder, literally. His regime allows foreign jihadists through Syrian territory to carry out attacks in Iraq. Syria has bolstered Hamas's intransigence over a settlement with Israel, and has encouraged the Palestinian Islamist movement to scuttle inter-Palestinian reconciliation. In Lebanon, Syrian meddling has been unrelenting since the pullout of its soldiers, while Assad has armed or allowed the rearming of the Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah, violating U.N. Resolution 1701 that ended the Lebanon war of 2006.

(To full article)
.

U.S.-Syria Relations: Syrian Dictator Bashar al-Assad Complains that America isn’t Giving Him Enough Concessions in Exchange for Nothing

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
04 November 09

As I’ve previously reported, policy toward Syria has been the best-run aspect of Obama Administration foreign policy. That’s largely because it has been left in the hands of State Department officials who have no illusions about that radical dictatorship which is Iran’s closest ally and is determined to remain that way.

Now Syrian dictator President Bashar al-Assad has complained to the country’s official news agency, November 1, that while the U.S. government is talking instead of “commanding” nothing much has changed with the Obama Administration. "It is hard to say that big steps have been taken in bilateral relations," Assad said.

More American official delegations are going to Damascus but they’re not being converted by the trip. One topic they are pressing is better Syrian control over its border with Iraq, a euphemism for: stopping helping terrorism in Iraq.

More than four months after the U.S. government announced it would send an ambassador to Syria for the first time in years, nobody has been named.

Now, the problem with tough diplomacy can be that it does not “work” immediately or seemingly not at all. This is a persistent Obama Administration criticism of its predecessors: they were tough on Iran and other radicals but the problems didn’t go away. Right! But what’s better:

--To be tough on enemies in order to weaken them, isolate them, put them on notice to change their behavior, and reinforce the determination of those being attacked by them in the region (in this case, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia) OR

--To be soft on enemies, persuading them you are weak so they will be more aggressive, giving them concessions all the better to eat you with, and demoralizing the radicals’ victims by acting as if you are on the side of the “bad guys?”

After all, Syria continues to:

Arm, finance, transport, and encourage terrorists murdering American soldiers and Iraqi civilians; oppose peace with Israel; try to seize control over Lebanon; sponsor terrorism against Israel, Lebanon, and Jordan; refuse to cooperate with the international tribunal investigating past Syrian terrorism in Lebanon; deny human rights at home and torture peaceful dissidents; and a long list of other such things.

The main criticism I have toward Obama Administration policy on this issue is the failure to support Iraqi government complaints against Syria for sponsoring terrorism and giving safe haven to its leadership, a failure you can read about here and here. Remember that these groups are openly part of al-Qaida and even the Obama Administration says that the United States is at war with al-Qaida.

.

A Syrian Blogger Silenced

David Keyes
Adelson Institute
Reposted 18 October 09

David Keyes, Coordinator for Programs in Democracy at the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies, writes about the fate of a Syrian freedom fighter and the mistakes of an American Administration. Read also in Point of View on Why Russia is Not Afraid of an Iranian Bomb by Boris Morozov andThe Goldstone Factor by Yossi Klein Halevi.

When Syrian deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal Mekdad visited Washington in early October, he became the highest-ranking Syrian to visit America in half a decade. During his visit, Mekdad lavishly praised President Obama and his dialogue-based approach towards the Middle East. Nothing could be better proof that Washington is pursuing failed policies in the region. When the senior representatives of a ruthless dictatorship praise you, chances are you are doing something very wrong.

Mekdad, and his boss Bashar al-Assad, are clearly relieved that President Obama loosened sanctions on Syria this past July. They know that America is determined to pry Syria away from the Iran-Hezbollah axis and they are playing it for all it's worth. While Americans rejoice at every step in this process, the Assad dictatorship remains as oppressive as ever. Only two and a half weeks prior to the deputy Foreign Minister's sycophantic gushing over President Obama in Washington, his government was sentencing bloggers to prison for the unthinkable "crime" of voicing dissent.

Consider the case of Kareem Arabji, a 31 year old business consultant who helps manage the online youth forumwww.akhawia.net. Kareem supervised Al Mabar Al Hur, a section within akhawia.net dedicated to free ideas, and wrote numerous articles under a pseudonym criticizing corruption and dictatorship in Syria. On June 7, 2007 Arabji was arrested by Syrian security forces and held incommunicado at the Palestine Branch of Military Intelligence in Damascus. He was charged with, "broadcasting false or exaggerated news which would affect the morale of the country.”

Just what outrageous, unforgivable words did Kareem utter that so threatened the Syrian nation? "The press is a very important mechanism to struggle against the corruption, there should not be any restrictions or obstacles to it," he wrote in Akhawia. Or perhaps it was his skepticism of the Syria-Hamas alliance: "Since I was a kid in school we were always taught that the Muslim Brotherhood is a criminal gang, and I agree. And now we proudly consider Hamas, which is a Muslim Brotherhood proxy, as an ally!!!?"
On September 13, 2009, Arabji was sentenced by a Syrian court to three years in prison.

Did President Obama raise Arabji's imprisonment while his tormentor toured Washington? No. To do so would be to jeopardize "peace," "diplomacy" or some other fiction masquerading as prudence which in actuality prolongs a hideous tyranny. Mekdad's visit was a golden opportunity to make Arabji's name as famous as Havel, Bukovsky and Sharansky once were. Instead, the most powerful nation in history remained silent.

In theory, President Obama's approach makes perfect sense. Encourage Syria to moderate its policies and tilt Westward instead of Iran-ward. But as the idiom goes: In theory there is no difference between theory and reality, but in reality there is. Not only is America feeding an alligator hoping to be eaten last, but the Obama administration does not grasp that true peace and lasting regional stability cannot be purchased at the expense of human liberty. If Syria cuts its ties with Iran, but remains a fearful, impoverished, repressive and conspiratorial society, the West--let alone the Syrian people-- are no better off. America's goal should be to terrorize the Syrian dictator more than he terrorizes his bloggers.. Sakharov and Sharansky's brilliant dictum is simple enough: A nation can only be trusted as much as its leaders trust their own citizens. By this standard, America should be isolating and punishing Syria, rather than appeasing and rewarding it.

Despite a sustained public relations campaign in the West, Syria remains one of the most repressive regimes in the Middle East. Those who voice dissent are regularly intimidated, arrested, tortured and imprisoned. In September 2009 the Jordanian Business Magazine reported that Syria blocks at least "160 web sites, including Facebook, Amazon, YouTube, and the popular online-telephone service, Skype." Cyberdissidents such as Arabji face regular harassment from security forces. Ironically, article 38 of the Syrian constitution allows "the right to freely express one's opinions by spoken word, in writing or in any other medium." But this is little more than hollow rhetoric. The same article also states that expression must be in a "manner that safeguards the soundness of the domestic and nationalist structure and strengthens the socialist system." This clause effectively guts any true form of freedom of expression in Syria.

What kind of regime tortures bloggers and shuts down Facebook? Only one that is terrified of truth and free thinking. This, ultimately, is a sign of deep insecurity, not strength. The good news is that although political repression can work for a time, the forward march of history records that few forces are as powerful as a liberated soul. Someone should tell this to Obama.

David Keyes is the Director of Cyberdissidents.org and the Coordinator for Democracy Programs at the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies.