Overnight the UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs published the report of its investigations into the British Government’s actions in relation to the Middle East.
This is a very detailed report after a series of hearings. There are many detailed recommendations but the principle theme is one of continuing and starting engagement with groups likely to be hostile to the UK. This has most resonance with Barak Obama’s declared intention to talk to such governments as those of Iran.
The full report is in .pdf format here
The conclusions and recommendations are at the start of the report with all of the detailed interpretation and evidence later. The details are country by country so I have extracted the comments that refer to the need for dialogue.
Iran
(Paragraph 32)
We conclude that Iran is rapidly increasing its influence and power across the
Middle East. It has demonstrated that it is able to generate or exploit crises in a range
of countries, thus furthering its own interests. We conclude that it is vital that the UK
and the international community engage constructively and coherently with Iran on
these difficult issues.
Syria
(Paras 20-23 in part)
We conclude that Syria plays a significant role in most of the key areas in the Middle
East and that this role may slowly be changing for the better. The support of Syria
will be of great assistance to efforts to promote stability in the Middle East, in
Lebanon and in Iraq in particular. This cannot be ignored when the Government
and the international community engage in diplomacy with the Syrian authorities.In our view, the EU ban on
ministerial contact with Syria is not helpful in the context of engaging constructively
with the Syrian Government. We recommend that the Government resume such
contacts without delay. We further recommend that the Government continue to
support the work of Javier Solana as part of the EU’s engagement with Syria.There is no excuse for Syria not to co-operate fully with the international tribunal
over the death of Rafik Hariri and in no circumstances should this be negotiated
away. However, we conclude that more can be done to reassure Syria that efforts to
build a workable democratic state in Lebanon are not aimed at destabilising the
regime in Damascus.We conclude that the European Union Association Agreement with Syria presents a
powerful incentive for President Assad to remedy his country’s political behaviour,
We conclude that Syria plays a significant role in most of the key areas in the Middle
East and that this role may slowly be changing for the better. The support of Syria
will be of great assistance to efforts to promote stability in the Middle East, in
Lebanon and in Iraq in particular. This cannot be ignored when the Government
and the international community engage in diplomacy with the Syrian authorities.
(Paragraph 139)
21. We conclude that the Government’s decision to send Sir Nigel Sheinwald to
Damascus in October 2006 was the correct one. In our view, the EU ban on
ministerial contact with Syria is not helpful in the context of engaging constructively
with the Syrian Government. We recommend that the Government resume such
contacts without delay. We further recommend that the Government continue to
support the work of Javier Solana as part of the EU’s engagement with Syria.
(Paragraph 144)
22. There is no excuse for Syria not to co-operate fully with the international tribunal
over the death of Rafik Hariri and in no circumstances should this be negotiated
away. However, we conclude that more can be done to reassure Syria that efforts to
build a workable democratic state in Lebanon are not aimed at destabilising the
regime in Damascus. (Paragraph 148)
23. We conclude that the European Union Association Agreement with Syria presents a
powerful incentive for President Assad to remedy his country’s political behaviour,
The last reference to an EU Association agreement is an aspect of the “soft diplomacy” of providing incentives to peaceful co-operation and democratization by allowing preferential access to the EU markets.
Hezbollah
After remarking that the Blair Government’s delay over cslling for the cessation of fighting early in the Lebanon War (in lockstep with Bush) had “done significant damage to the UK’s reputation in much of the world”, it goes on to again challenge the current policy of isolating Hezbollah. Paragraph 19 recognizes the umbrella nature of the organisation and that it contains factions which can be constructively engaged.
We conclude that Hezbollah is undeniably an important element in Lebanon’s
politics, although its influence, along with Iran’s and Syria’s, continues to be a malign
one. We further conclude that, as the movement will realistically only be disarmed
through a political process, the Government should encourage Hezbollah to play a
part in Lebanon’s mainstream politics. We recommend that the Government should
engage directly with moderate Hezbollah Parliamentarians. The Government should
continue to refuse to engage with the military wing of Hezbollah.
Palestine
The policy of isolating Hammas, the Committee concludes, played negative role in the region. While not directly leading to the breakdown of the unity government in Palestine after the Mecca Agreement, it did nothing to stop it. As with Hezbollah, the Committee recognises the number of factions within Hammas and in paragraph 7 calls for a change in the policy of isolating the moderate factions:
Given the failure of the boycott to deliver results, we recommend that the
Government should urgently consider ways of engaging politically with moderate
elements within Hamas as a way of encouraging it to meet the three Quartet
principles. We conclude that any attempts to pursue a `West Bank first’ policy would
risk further jeopardising the peace process. We recommend that the Government
urge President Abbas to come to a negotiated settlement with Hamas with a view to
re-establishing a national unity Government across the Occupied Palestinian
Territories.
Clearly these recommendations to engage diplomatically conflict with both Bush and Blair’s policies. It will be interesting to see if Gordon Brown continues his separation from Bush by accepting the Committee’s view.
