Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Syria Criticizes Sanctions, Seeks Talks
The Las Vegas Sun ^ | May 12, 2004 at 11:56:33 PDT | SAM F. GHATTAS

Posted on 05/12/2004 12:40:28 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) - Syria denounced U.S. economic sanctions on Wednesday and other Arab countries - including close U.S. allies - joined in the criticism. Europe ignored the penalties by dispatching a trade delegation to Damascus.

Some Arabs questioned the validity of the measures and the motives behind them, saying they serve Israeli - not American - interests and could further antagonize Arab feelings toward the United States, already soured by the war in Iraq, the prisoner-abuse scandal and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Neighboring Lebanon may prove to be a major loophole in the sanctions, which ban all U.S. exports to Syria except food and medicine and forbids flights between Syria and the United States. Goods have traditionally flowed across the border from Lebanon to Syria.

Trade between the United States and Syria amounts to only $300 million a year and there are currently no flights between Syrian and U.S. airports. But the political effect of the measures could surpass the economic impact.

Syrian Prime Minister Naji al-Otari said the sanctions were "unjust and unjustified," and played down their effects while expressing hope for continued dialogue with Washington.

Damascus Radio, which reflects government thinking, took a harder line, saying sanctions would complicate matters in a region where stability is needed.

"If Washington expects that the penalties will lead to Syria's isolation or marginalizing its role, this role is not a matter for compromise or blackmail," the radio said.

The United States imposed the embargo on Tuesday as a response to allegations that Syria was supporting terrorism and undermining U.S. efforts in neighboring Iraq.

The 22-member Arab League said Wednesday the embargo would harden Arab opinion against the United States. In a statement, the organization said the sanctions would "add to the sour feelings in the region and will raise more questions among Arab people" about U.S. plans for the region.

"The imposition of sanctions does not serve the interests of stability and peace, to which all Arab states aspire," the statement said.

Egypt and Kuwait, the United States' closest Arab allies, criticized the measures.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher said in Cairo that "sanctions and threats are not beneficial and they will not work."

"I don't think the U.S. decision is a useful decision," Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sheik Mohammed al-Sabah said.

President Emile Lahoud of Lebanon, where Syria dominates with thousands of troops, said the sanctions were "wrong in content and timing" and were influenced by Israel. His foreign minister, Jean Obeid, said the sanctions will harm America's image in the region and "will send very bad signals serving the extremist team in Israel and will not serve American or Arab interests."

The sanctions authorize the U.S. Treasury Department to freeze the assets of Syrian nationals and entities involved in terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, the occupation of Lebanon and terrorism in Iraq. They also restrict relations between U.S. banks and the Syrian national bank.

The United States has long complained Damascus is supporting militant groups such as the Palestinian Hamas and the Lebanese Hezbollah. It also accuses Syria of failing to stop guerrillas from crossing the border into Iraq. Syria has been on the State Department's list of terror-sponsoring countries.

Syria regards Hamas and Hezbollah as legitimate groups fighting the Israeli occupation of Arab lands. It maintains it is trying to stop fighters from crossing into Iraq but cannot completely control its long border with its southeastern neighbor.

Europeans took a different stand from Washington. Spain extended an invitation to President Bashar Assad to visit in early June, and a high-level EU trade delegation will travel to Syria this weekend in an attempt to improve cooperation on exporting oil and gas to Europe.

Britain, America's closest European ally which has good relations with Syria, said it shares America's concerns. But Prime Minister Tony Blair will continue a policy of "critical and constructive engagement" with Syria, his office said Wednesday. Blair and Assad have exchanged visits in the past.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: sanctions; syria
Earlier piece from Reuters:

US Chose Bad Time to Impose Syria Sanctions-Arabs

1 posted on 05/12/2004 12:40:29 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
What are the odds that Hassad is stil in charge in 1w months?
2 posted on 05/12/2004 12:44:33 PM PDT by ken5050 (Ann Coulter needs to have children ASAP to propagate her genes.....any volunteers?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
What are the odds that Hassad is stil in charge in 12 months?
3 posted on 05/12/2004 12:44:48 PM PDT by ken5050 (Ann Coulter needs to have children ASAP to propagate her genes.....any volunteers?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Europe ignored the penalties by dispatching a trade delegation to Damascus.

Our true friends

4 posted on 05/12/2004 12:45:01 PM PDT by One More Time (Obliterate the Democrat party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

If the Arabs say it's a bad time to impose sanctions on Syria, then it must be a really GOOD time to do so.

Not only are they lying scum, but they are lousy at reverse psychology.

In my current mood, I would be inclined to do WAY MORE than impose sanctions on Syria.

Perhaps a few well-placed MOABs followed by a blockade.

Nothing going in, nothing coming out, until they tell us where their local Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hizbollah rabble are hiding, which would then be promptly followed by a few more well-placed MOABs.
5 posted on 05/12/2004 12:45:58 PM PDT by Westbrook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Tell the Syrians that they have a choice of two paths: the path of Quadaffi or the path of Saddam. And tell them while they're thinking about it that (1) the Israelis are mobilizing, (2) the United States has ordered full mobilization, and (3) we will not be as gentle with Syria as we have been with Iraq.
6 posted on 05/12/2004 12:46:29 PM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
I like that and agree!
7 posted on 05/12/2004 12:51:24 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Well, gee whiz, if the effect is only going to be political, and if it's going to be bad for the US, why would Syria even bother to comment?

Syria should just blow it off. Go ahead, Syria. I dare you. ;-D
8 posted on 05/12/2004 12:51:53 PM PDT by Judith Anne (HOW ARE WE EVER GOING TO CLEAN UP ALL THIS MESS?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Whatever the problems in Iraq, Saddam is in the calaboose and his brats are dead. Surely Assad can see his alternatives as death or cooperation with the US if they're put that starkly. I can't imagine too many of the scum running Syria really wants to see a US/Israeli combined arms offensive which takes out first Syria's air defenses and air force, then its army. Where could they go? What ground could they defend if the Israelis moved from the West from Golan and a couple of American armored divisions moved from the East. The Jordanians would lie low, interning any Syrians fleeing across the border, and the Turks would probably do likewise, or perhaps they could be bribed into a third front. I would not want to be Assad if the US gets serious about eliminating Syria as a source of Islamofascist fighters in Iraq. Would the Iranians come in? On their border with Iraq? Possible, but we need to make it very clear to the Iranians that will invoke a strategic weapons response.
9 posted on 05/12/2004 1:00:03 PM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I love President Bush. He will do what is right no matter the cost. If I had his ear for a moment, I would say these words of encouragement to him: "The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but they are mighty through the Holy Ghost. And they are strong to the pulling down of strongholds/" In Genesis 15:6, quoted in Galatians 3:6, "Abraham believed God, and his faith was accounted for tsedaqah" -- the substantive of tsedeq, "righteousness" -- his faith was accounted for righteousness, for justification."

The fleece that President Bush laid out to God before he took us to war in Iraq confirmed that that was the course he was to take. I do not think the President makes a decision without much prayer and seeking God's will.

He should ask those Christian soldiers in Iraq(and their families and those Christians here at home)to kneel to the One True God and cry out to Him for the destruction of those who hate His people. Then, like Joshua in the Battle of Jericho, they should march around those stronghold cities 7 times and with a mighty shout to Jehovah for His mercy and the show of His Mighty Hand bring down those walls.

10 posted on 05/12/2004 1:03:40 PM PDT by The Grim Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I completely support the sanctions. What courage it takes for a leader & country to do what should be done in face of bad PR.

On the other hand, we should consider skipping the sanctions _game_ entirely (cause it _is_ a game whereby they continue to hide their production and support of WMD and terrorism), and smash this evil regime !?

12 posted on 05/12/2004 1:27:54 PM PDT by veracious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Roll out the Thompson gunners.
13 posted on 05/12/2004 1:29:20 PM PDT by schaketo (Never skinny dip in the same pond as snapping turtles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher said in Cairo that "sanctions and threats are not beneficial and they will not work." "I don't think the U.S. decision is a useful decision," Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sheik Mohammed al-Sabah said.

Hmmm, the brother Muslims have a point.

Overwhelming Force is a much better option. Bombing commences in 10 minutes.

Who says we don't listen to our allies ?

14 posted on 05/12/2004 1:50:40 PM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillOckham
Rein in the figgin' Israelis and all this trouble in the region will melt away.

I don't think so. The Syrians have been strong supporters of terror. As soon as the Arabs are willing to absolutely renounce violence against Israel, stop teaching Jew-hatred, and clearly and publicly acknowledge, in Arabic as well as in English, the right of Israel and its citizens to exist, and gives up its goal of driving the Jews into the sea, or subjecting them to Islamic rule, then I'll think about reining in the Israelis.

Before the Arab rejection of the deal Clinton brokered via the Oslo process, I was a believer that the Arabs were willing to reconcile themselves to a two state solution, and would have been willing to force the Israelis to give up a great deal, if not all, of what they took in 1967. I'm not Jewish, and frankly have no special ties to or brief for, Israel. Except that it is a relatively democratic (if rather socialist) republic with more liberty than any other country in that godforsaken part of the world. But, it's not as if the Arabs even acknowledge the legitimacy of those borders, the Arabs would like to see Israel destroyed. Before 9/11, it was easy to laugh off Palestinian rejectionism. Looking back on it, it's all of a piece with Islamofascism.

Had the Arabs absorbed the Palestinians in 1948, as Pakistan and India absorbed the refugees displaced by the fighting after independence, there would be no Palestinian problem today. The arabs, including our "buddies" the Saudis, created the problem. I'm not sympathtic to them anymore.

15 posted on 05/12/2004 1:55:48 PM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Poohbah; veronica
I think the time for TALKING with Syria is running out fast.
16 posted on 05/12/2004 2:03:04 PM PDT by hchutch ("Go ahead. Leave early and beat the traffic. The Milwaukee Brewers dare you." - MLB.com 5/11/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson