Palestinian reconciliation ...?

Was the recent accord signed between Fatah and Hamas provoked by a genuine change of heart or merely another consequence of the Arab Spring? ICG delves into the key issues in a new report here.

Jordan: barriers to reform

Suleiman al-Khalidi of Reuters has a good round-up here of the pressures facing Jordan in the current Arab Spring (read: static summer) and the obstructionist policies of the country's old guard to ensure their interests, and not those of the state, remain protected at any cost.

Egypt and Palestine

Helena Cobban has a good piece here on what has, or has not changed in Gaza as a result of the Egyptian uprising.

Lebanon's new government

After 5 months of deadlock, Lebanon has a new government dominated by Hezbollah and its allies. Paul Salem of Carnegie Middle East Centre has some good analysis here.

Obama sticks by Assad, for now

With the situation in Syria getting worse by the day and Bashar al-Assad sanctioning an all out military assault on his own people, one can't help but wonder when the US will begin to take a much stronger line with the Assad regime. As Tony Badran points out on the Foreign Policy blog, "Assad's brutality has already cost him critical relations with three countries that have been instrumental in his efforts to rehabilitate himself in the world: France, Qatar, and Turkey". Even Israel's Defence Minister Ehud Barak, has stated on record that Assad "has lost his legitimacy" - though I still suspect the Israelis would still prefer the devil they know to protect their northern border.

But so far Washington's position has remained unchanged, i.e., limited sanctions and calls for reform. For the Obama administration, already struggling with multiple challenges to its Middle East security structure, the consequences of the Assad regime falling and the regional turmoil that would inevitable follow are just too big to contemplate. However, with the level of regime brutality escalating by the day, this position is becoming increasingly untenable. The line from Washington has been that it has no leverage. This is not entirely true. For a start, the US could withdraw its Ambassador in Damascus and declare the Syrian regime illegitimate. This would have a significant impact in sending a strong message to the protesters, the international community and the regime. Strong US leadership would result in more galvanised international action.

Strong US leadership in confronting the Assad regime has worked in the past. International pressure led by the US in 2005 resulted in UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which forced the Syrians to pull out of Lebanon . The circumstances, of course, were different and the regime was facing external rather than internal challenges to its rule. But it did demonstrate one thing: that the threat of force is the only thing that the Assad clan understands (Syria was worried that it would become the next target after Iraq for the pro-Israel neocons in Washington). This is not a call for military intervention, but rather a clearer and consistent US strategy in the region, which has been badly lacking since the start of the Arab uprisings.

A picture paints a thousand words

Who's been a naughty boy then? Crown Prince of Bahrain, Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, is looking very nervous before a none too pleased Hilary Clinton during a 'brief' meeting on June 7th. Relations between the two allies have become somewhat fraught in recent weeks as the al-Khalifi regime has been busy proving what a brutal US client it really is, even going as far as to running state security court trials for doctors accused of 'treating injured protesters'. Read Simon Henderson's recent analysis here.

Nasrallah backs Assad's repression

Hassan Nasrallah broke his long, long silence on Syria on May 25 and with it probably his reputation throughout the entire Middle East by backing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's brutal repression of his people. In a 2008 Zogby poll Nasrallah was voted the most popular leader in the Arab world, a significant achievement for a Shia leader in a Sunni-dominated region. After his recent comments in support of Assad, however, i doubt he will retain this position for much longer.

I think it's fair to say that Ranna Kabbani's post on the al-Bab blog just about sums up the feelings of betrayal felt by the Syrian people as they witness one of their former heroes and self-styled champion of the oppressed side against them in their time of need. Describing Nasrallah's speech, Kabbani states:

"As ever, it took on the mythic pageantry of a Passion Play. Nasrallah began by urging his many listeners to suffer the few hours of their wait in the burning sun to hear him, as a way of sharing the burning experience of all those who suffered and sacrificed so greatly to bring this occasion about.

"He then broke his long, long silence on the popular intifada in Syria, only to side totally and categorically with the killers in the Syrian regime. As a Syrian watching this, who knows what great popularity Nasrallah once enjoyed in her country, where photos of him were on display everywhere – making his the only face ever allowed to be added to the Assad iconography of Father, Son and Holy Ghost – or Hafiz, Bashar and the departed Basil – so depravedly and cynically modelled on Christian religious belief. I felt viscerally that something had shifted irrevocably as the chairman uttered his unfortunate words. No wonder that his image was torched almost at once after this speech in Deraa and Muaddamiyya and Homs and Hama and Bou Kamal and other centres of our intifada."