By Jonathan Wright

CAIRO, Dec 6 (Reuters) - The Bush administration will ignore unwelcome recommendations on Middle East policy from the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, Arab commentators said on Wednesday.

The study group, led by former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker, proposed abandoning President George W. Bush's policy of trying to isolate Syria and Iran and resuming attempts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which Bush has given low priority.

But Arab commentators said changing course on these policies at this stage in his presidency was more than they expected from a president who has shown little flexibility.

Taken as a whole, the recommendations would amount to a volte-face in the Middle East policy which Bush has followed for the past six years.

The case could be different in Iraq, where Bush faces an urgent need to save his reputation and avert complete disaster, they said.

"The Bush administration is probably in a state of mind where it would not implement these things, especially the Syria-Iran part of it," said Walid Kazziha, professor of political studies at the American University in Cairo.

HOSTILITY TOWARDS SYRIA AND IRAN

"These are good recommendations and would go a long way to alleviate the problems the Americans are facing but I doubt very much they will take them seriously," he added.

Mohamed el-Sayed Said, deputy director of the Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo, said Bush was too far gone in his hostility toward Syria and Iran to engage in serious talks with the two governments now.

"Syria has shown signs it is willing to engage but I don't think the Bush administration is in a mood to do that with Syria and Iran. This advice will not be heeded," he added.

He said he also doubted that Bush was willing to put pressure on Israel for a compromise in the way that his father, President George Bush, and James Baker did back in 1991.

"That takes a lot of guts. He would have to deal with the Israelis, would have to exercise power and pressure. I don't see them acting on that recommendation," he added.

Adel al-Harby, political editor at the leading Saudi daily al-Riyadh, agreed the administration would not engage with Damascus and Tehran.

"I think it's too early to talk about dialogue with either of them in the present situation. The U.S. administration wants dialogue between Baghdad and both Damascus and Tehran, not between Washington and Damascus and Tehran," he said.

The initial response to the study group's recommendations from Syria and Iran was cautiously positive.

COMPROMISE NEEDED

Ali Aghamohammadi, a member of Iran's powerful Supreme National Security Council, told Reuters the report deserved serious consideration. But he added: "America's engagement (with Iran) should be based on a win-win strategy."

A former senior Iranian official told Reuters talks with the United States would have to include compromises, including U.S. compromises on Iran's nuclear programme.

"As America could not compromise on Iran's nuclear issue, Iran also cannot focus on assisting America to resolve Iraq's issue. Everything is related to each other," added the former official, who asked not to be named.

In Damascus political commentator Ayman Abdel Nour, a member of the reformist wing of the ruling Baath Party, said the recommendation on Syria was wise and noted that Baker visited Syria many times as secretary of state.

He added: "The United States is unlikely to open direct dialogue ... but will seek to do it through its Iraqi allies. The leadership here will continue to send positive signals."

In the Gulf, where the perspective is a little different due to the fear of Shi'ite Muslim domination in Iraq, commentators said local governments would welcome the lack of a fixed timetable for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

"I don't think the kingdom (Saudi Arabia) can welcome leaving Iraq at this stage. The kingdom has said repeatedly that the occupation forces should play their role in Iraq, not withdraw," said Harby of al-Riyadh newspaper.

"There are still many obstacles to a withdrawal, like dissolving the militias, (and) strengthening the army... There will be conflict in Washington over this, but I don't think there will be a (major) withdrawal in 2007," he added. (Additional reporting by Andrew Hammond in Riyadh, Inal Ersan in Dubai, Khaled Oweis in Damascus, Dan Williams in Jerusalem and Parisa Hafezi in Tehran)

AlertNet news is provided by

Delicio.us  |   Digg  |   NewsVine  |   Reddit                                                                                  Permalink