THE ZIGZAG POLICY

When Syria and the USSR got closer during the Cold War, the US automatically included this Middle Eastern country in the list of its enemies. Back in 1957, the Kremlin offered an assistance to the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR) in the amount of $500 million. Relations between Moscow and Damascus improved even more in 1970, when Hafez Assad, a graduate of a Soviet military school, became the president of the country. And in 1971, a Soviet-Syrian agreement was concluded on the construction of a naval base in the Syrian port city of Tartus on the Mediterranean coast.

Last element of the Triangle of Evil

Since then, Syria's relations with the United States have deteriorated annually. In particular, due to the Syrian-Israeli wars and the occupation of the Golan Heights by Israel in 1967. In 1976, Syria stationed its military contingent in Lebanon allegedly to counter the civil war in the country. This incident further exacerbated its relations with Washington. Three years later, the US included Syria in the list of countries sponsoring terrorism. After the 1982 incident in the city of Hama involving the Syrian army, international pressure on the country has intensified. Finally, Damascus' support for anti-American groups in Lebanon has seriously damaged the US-Syrian relations.

The weakening and subsequent collapse of the USSR had a certain impact on Syrian-American relations. During the 1991 war in the Persian Gulf, Syria, along with other regional Arab countries, joined the international coalition against Iraq, although ideologically Hafez Assad and Saddam Hussein were committed to similar positions. As a result of this positive gesture from the Syrian side, the relations of the Assad government with Washington noticeably softened in the 1990s, although the sanctions remained in force and Washington often criticized Syria's military presence in Lebanon.

The 9/11 incident followed by the activation of the US foreign policy triggered the next round of deterioration in the US-Syrian relations. After the death of Hafez Assad in 2000, his son Bashar Assad replaced him as the head of state. By that time, he had already completed his education in London, and was a promising young ophthalmologist.

But the situation and order in the region have changed. Thus, Syria was on the list of one of the main accomplices of the Middle Eastern armed groups fighting against Israel. In addition, it openly supported paramilitary movements like Hezbollah and Hamas, including the accommodation of the Hamas Politburo in Damascus. At the same time, the Assad government moved closer to Iran. Washington was also annoyed that the Syrians were hosting representatives of military-political groups who fled Iraq after the 2003 American invasion. President George W. Bush, Jr. declared Syria the last element of the so-called Triangle of Evil, also including Iran and North Korea as the other two vertices.

In December 2002, President Bush signed the Syria Accountability Act. The law condemned Syria's support for terrorism, the development of weapons of mass destruction, introduction of foreign fighters into Iraq, and required the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon.

In May 2004, Washington announced a batch of sanctions against Syria, which put an end to the trade relations with the country. However, the sanctions have not caused much concern in the Syrian government. First, the country's relatively low trade with the US ($300 million) was counterbalanced by trade relations with Europe, with annual operations worth $7 billion. Secondly, there was a high level of anti-American sentiment in Syria, encouraged by the explicit support of the Assad government by Iran. Also, the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights and the bombing of the suburbs of Damascus in 2003 further increased public support for President Assad and his anti-American policies.

The policy of political changes

Amid the worsening relations with the US, Bashar al-Assad has sought to improve relations with Turkey and Europe. In particular, Damascus sent a message of friendship to Ankara. After the assassination of the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri in 2005 and the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon under international pressure, the Assad government intensified its efforts to improve international relations. By the way, it was the assassination of R. Hariri that forced the US to suspend diplomatic relations with Syria and recall its ambassador from the country.

Perhaps, the year 2008 can be considered the beginning of a series of changes in the American policy in the Middle East. The then Republican President George W. Bush, Jr. was replaced by the Democrat Barack Obama. As soon as in 2009, President Obama made visits to Egypt and Turkey, announcing a change in the US policy towards the Muslim world. The most obvious signs of a shift in the US Middle East policy have been observed in Syria. Thus, after a five-year pause, Washington appointed Robert Ford as the new (and the last) ambassador to Damascus.  In February 2010, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns visited Damascus to meet with the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid Muallem and President Bashar al-Assad.

However, this thaw in Syrian-American relations did not last long either. The protests, which began in Syria on March 15, 2011, soon escalated into a civil war, hence deteriorating relations between the US and Syria again. Trying to avoid direct intervention in the Middle Eastern and other conflicts around the world, the Obama administration has limited itself to pursuing a cautious policy towards Syria. The main ‘tools’ of this policy were the regional allies of the United States, mainly Turkey and the Arab League. In August 2011, President Obama announced that "President Bashar al-Assad must go." And in February 2012, the US recalled its ambassador to Damascus and suspended diplomatic relations with Syria.

However, Washington failed to implement its plans with regard to Damascus because Russia and China effectively blocked the mechanisms of international political pressure of the US government on Syria. These mechanisms included the plan of the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and resolutions proposed for approval by the UN Security Council. Moreover, unlike the Iraqi campaign of George W. Bush, Jr., the Obama administration did not dare to directly invade Syria without the appropriate UN sanctions.

On the other hand, a number of local factors prevented Washington's tough scenario of intervention in the Syrian conflict. For example, the strengthening of Al-Qaeda and similar terrorist groups in Syria and their advantage in the opposition front. Yet Washington continued to support the Syrian opposition, but did not approve of radical Islamist groups, distancing itself from them whenever possible. Nevertheless, there were certain contacts through Turkey and the militant camps in Jordan at the initial stage of the Syrian conflict. However, Washington cut ties with radical groups after the assassination of the American ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevenson, in Benghazi in 2012.

Another spike in the US-Syrian tensions came in 2013 after the Syrian government was accused of participating in a chemical attack on opposition forces. The issue of the US military invasion of Syria became relevant after the Pentagon dispatched ships in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, the UN Security Council did not approve the military intervention, replacing it with Russia's initiative to take the Syrian chemical weapons arsenal under international control.

Moreover, the format of Washington's participation in the Syrian conflict changed after the emergence of ISIS in northern Syria back in 2013, as well as the capture of the Lebanese city of Qusayr by Hezbollah. As a result, the civil war in Syria escalated into a full-scale conflict with the participation of foreign troops. The rapid rise of ISIS in Iraq and Syria in early 2014 pushed Washington to an alliance with the Kurdish forces opposing ISIS fighters in the north of the country, rather than the Syrian opposition. But at the same time, the US continued to provide political and financial support to the military-political opposition in Syria.

In August 2014, Washington formed a military coalition against ISIS, including more than 60 countries. With the support of the Kurdish forces, the coalition carried out a series of successful bombing raids in Iraq and Syria. As a result, significant changes took place both in the format of the Syrian conflict and in the approach of Washington.

New President = New Politics

Another change in Washington's Syrian policy occurred after the victory of Republican Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential elections. The new host of the White House has taken a rather tough stance on Syria.

Thus, on April 7, 2017, two US Navy ships launched 59 Tomahawk missiles at a military base of the Syrian government army at the Al-Shayrat airport near Homs in response to the Syrian army's alleged use of nerve gas sarin against the opposition in the city of Khan Sheikhoun.

After the incident, President Trump said that the operation was carried out under his personal order. However, the operation did not go further, and the American army did not invade Syria contrary to expectations. On April 14, 2018, the US Army bombed the Syrian military positions again. This time around - the chemical weapons laboratories of the Syrian army located near Damascus, as well as the city of Homs. Washington explained the attack as a response to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian armed forces in Ghouta area near the capital. During the operation, the US Army was supported by the military aviation of Great Britain and France. However, the airstrikes did not turn into a large-scale military intervention in Syria again.

In November 2020, Republican Trump lost the presidential election to the Democrat Joseph Biden, who previously served as the US Vice President under the Obama administration. In other words, Biden was involved in shaping Obama's policies. Despite the assumptions about a possible change in the US foreign policy towards Syria, it seems that no major changes can be expected. However, since the beginning of this year, the Biden administration has launched a negotiation process with permanent members of the UN Security Council to boost the political settlement of the Syrian conflict in line with the UNSC Resolution 2254 proposed by the United States back in 2015. Washington noted, however, that relations with the Assad government will not be restored.

The US State Department spokesman Ned Price said the Biden administration supports the political settlement process that will end the war in Syria. Allies continue to coordinate their actions on this issue, including with the UN Secretary General's special envoy for Syria. And Washington will continue to use international means to reach a political solution. Mr. Price also said that in order to end the war, the Assad government must first change its behaviour.

Apparently, we should not expect any significant changes in Washington's Syrian policy in the near future. Sanctions against Damascus have been tightened since the Trump administration. This resulted in a sharp devaluation of the Syrian lira, as well as difficulties incurred with the import of foreign-made goods into the country, including food. Since last summer, there has been a grain shortage in Syria, for example.

The UN has called for the creation of an international tribunal to investigate crimes in Syria. The first step in this direction was recorded in February 2021 in Germany, when a court in Koblenz sentenced a former Syrian intelligence officer to four and a half years in prison "for aiding crimes against humanity." Hani al-Majali, a member of the UN international commission to investigate the situation in Syria, said that the commission was currently reviewing about 300 lawsuits related to Syria. Apparently, the result of these measures will be increased international pressure on the Syrian government, which will further limit the actions of Damascus.

Currently, an important factor for Damascus is the gradual deterioration of American relations with China and Russia. In fact, this makes it impossible to take unanimous international decisions against the Syrian government. Moreover, being Washington's main rivals in the region, Beijing and Moscow will try to keep Damascus in their sphere of influence for as long as possible. However, President Biden has more important problems to solve than Syria.