This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen
on .
It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
Former Ambassador to Syria Faults U.S. Stance Toward Rebels
Victory in Syrian Election Is Show of Assad’s Control
(about 7 hours later)
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Robert S. Ford, who was United States ambassador to Syria when the country’s uprising began in 2011 and went on to carry out American policy from abroad on the ensuing civil war, has revealed that he gave up his post in February because he could “no longer defend the policy in public.”
BEIRUT, Lebanon — President Bashar al-Assad of Syria on Wednesday celebrated his overwhelming victory in a deeply disputed election, asserting his confidence and defiance in the Syrian conflict as supporters savored his success in thwarting the United States.
Mr. Ford made the remarks on Tuesday night on PBS NewsHour.
Syrian officials announced that Mr. Assad had been re-elected with 88.7 percent of the vote and reported turnout of 73.4 percent of eligible voters. Those numbers could be questioned on many levels, but that did not matter much, as the election was primarily a display of Mr. Assad’s continued control of important Syrian cities, the loyalty of his core supporters and the failures of his opposition and its backers.
A proficient Arabic speaker and career diplomat with long service in the Arab world, Mr. Ford gained controversial prominence in Syria by addressing protesters in the central city of Hama early in the uprising against the rule of President Bashar al-Assad. The United States government pulled him out, citing credible security threats against him, and he became the point person trying to coordinate American dealings with both the armed and unarmed opposition.
For United States officials, it was a less triumphant day. Mr. Assad’s supporters celebrated with gunfire in Damascus and even in neighboring Lebanon, where Secretary of State John F. Kerry paid a visit on Wednesday. But the Americans were confronted with a sense that their policy on Syria and in the region was adrift.
“We’ve consistently been behind the curve,” Mr. Ford said on Tuesday. “Events on the ground are moving more rapidly than our policy has been adapting.”
The night before, Robert S. Ford, the career diplomat and Arabic speaker who was until recently the nominal ambassador to Syria and the main executor of American policy there, had declared on “PBS NewsHour” that he quit his post in February because the policy had failed and he “could no longer defend” it in public. He said that with the United States unwilling to seriously aid potential allies in the Syrian opposition, Russia and Iran had been “driving” the war’s dynamics by hugely increasing their support for Mr. Assad.
American officials began calling for Mr. Assad’s ouster and predicting his quick exit two years ago, raising the opposition’s hopes for substantive American aid that has yet to materialize. Instead, Mr. Assad has kept his footing both militarily and politically, and the country staged a presidential election on Tuesday to give Mr. Assad another term in office.
In Beirut, where Mr. Kerry made a surprise lightning visit, a Lebanese reporter asked if, given the timing a day after the Syrian election, he had rushed to the region “because of the miscalculation” by United States officials in declaring that Mr. Assad’s days were “numbered.” American officials began calling for Mr. Assad’s ouster and predicting his exit two years ago, raising the opposition’s hopes for substantive aid that has not materialized.
Secretary of State John Kerry, in Lebanon on Tuesday to meet political leaders, described the elections as “a great big zero.”
Mr. Kerry tried to leave the news conference after announcing a new American infusion of $290 million for United Nations agencies responding to the regional Syrian refugee crisis and answering preselected questions, but he returned to the podium to respond. Calling the election “a great big zero,” he added that the raging Syrian war and the refugee flows overwhelming Lebanon and other neighbors were destabilizing the region.
“They are meaningless because you can’t have an election where millions of your people don’t even have the ability to vote, where they don’t have the ability to contest the election, and they have no choice,” he said.
In his remarks, he had deployed a new tone regarding the role of Mr. Assad’s allies. While he blamed them for prolonging the “grotesque” war, he added, “I call on them — Iran, Russia, and I call on Hezbollah, based right here in Lebanon — to engage in the legitimate effort to bring this war to an end.”
He added, “All of us, all nations, have a responsibility to try to end this conflict,” particularly those directly supporting the Assad regime. He called on those supporters — Iran, Russia and Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group and political party — to make an effort “to bring this war to an end.” The statement was perhaps intended to convey toughness toward Mr. Assad’s main backers, while acknowledging that, as analysts have said, with the opposition unable to oust Mr. Assad, any solution would probably involve a compromise with those backing him.
Mr. Kerry was most likely not signaling a major shift in American policy toward Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group and political party that the United States lists as a terrorist organization. Still, Randa Slim, an analyst at the Middle East Institute, said it was notable that Mr. Kerry directly addressed the group as a stakeholder that could play a part in resolving the conflict.
On Tuesday, Mr. Ford said that as Mr. Assad held on, “Russia and Iran have been driving this” by “massively” increasing their support for the Syrian government, while the United States did too little to aid non-extremist elements in the opposition. That left the way open for extremist jihadists who could potentially threaten Americans, and who have even drawn some American recruits, he said, citing a Florida man who recently blew himself up in Syria.
Some analysts viewed it as a step toward recognition that a settlement could not be reached without all parties to the conflict. Previously, the United States had prevented Iran from taking part in talks.
“We need — and we have long needed — to help moderates in the Syrian opposition with both weapons and other nonlethal assistance,” Mr. Ford said. “Had we done that a couple of years ago, had we ramped it up, frankly, the Al Qaeda groups that have been winning adherents would have been unable to compete with the moderates who, frankly, we have much in common with. But the moderates have been fighting constantly with arms tied behind their backs, because they don’t have the same resources that either Assad does or the Al Qaeda groups in Syria do.”
Reporters had no chance to ask whether Mr. Kerry agreed with Mr. Ford that United States policy had failed and that the United States had missed a chance to arm nonextremist insurgents despite the recommendations of the State Department. A department spokeswoman, Marie Harf, has said that Mr. Ford was free to express his opinion as a private citizen and acknowledged that no one in the administration was satisfied with what was happening in Syria.
Privately, Mr. Ford and figures in the Syrian opposition have long expressed frustration with one another. The Syrians complained that Mr. Ford was too bossy and demanding and that he undermined their case in Washington by harping on their disunity. Mr. Ford sometimes became exasperated with the moderate opposition’s infighting and its inability to establish its bona fides on the ground.
Mr. Ford was United States ambassador to Syria when the country’s uprising began in 2011. He gained controversial prominence in Syria by addressing protesters in the central city of Hama early in the uprising against the rule of Mr. Assad. The United States government pulled him out, citing credible security threats against him, and he became the point person trying to coordinate American dealings with both the armed and unarmed opposition.
In his remarks on Tuesday, though, Mr. Ford suggested that he had fought behind the scenes for policy changes in Washington that he could not win. “Our policy was not evolving, and finally I got to a point where I could no longer defend it publicly,” he said. “And as a professional career member of the U.S. diplomatic service, when I could no longer defend the policy in public, it is time for me to go.” He retired from the State Department at the end of February.
“We’ve consistently been behind the curve,” Mr. Ford said on Tuesday.
Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman, has said that Mr. Ford is entitled to his views as a public citizen, and acknowledged that no one in the administration was satisfied with the situation in Syria. Officials say that significant new aid is planned for non-extremist insurgents in Syria, as President Obama outlined in his May 28 speech at West Point, but analysts say that the aid is unlikely to change the situation in Syria very much.
“We need — and we have long needed — to help moderates in the Syrian opposition with both weapons and other nonlethal assistance,” Mr. Ford added.
Mr. Ford said he was not clear whether the United States is “prepared to ramp up in a such a way that would be meaningful on the ground, and that’s what matters.”
At the United Nations on Wednesday, the top official overseeing the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons confirmed that Mr. Assad’s government would miss the June 30 deadline set by the Security Council for the arsenal’s destruction.
“This is a civil war, and we can’t get to a political negotiation until the balance on the ground compels — and I use that word precisely, compels — Assad not to run a sham election, but rather to negotiate a political deal.”
The official, Sigrid Kaag, told reporters the final shipment, 7.2 percent of the total, was ready to be exported for destruction abroad but was trapped in an area contested by insurgents.
Mr. Ford recently joined the Middle East Institute, a policy research center in Washington.
In Lebanon on Tuesday, Mr. Kerry announced a new American infusion of $290 million for United Nations agencies responding to the Syrian refugee crisis in the region, bringing the total from the United States to $2 billion.
