A reading between lines: Bin Nayef, Oğlu, Lieberman, and Lavrov

Written by Nasser Kandil, 

The symbolic phrases do not be on the top of the political speech of those who are daily preoccupied with politics-making by virtue of their positions, but only to establish decisive stages, that move from one background to another, and give a feature that is higher than politics, as the moving of Turkey on the days of the failure of its attempt to join the European Union, and its need for a new foreign policy that does not bear the frustrating failure. The words of its Foreign Minister Davutoglu at that time was about a new theory as a basis of the bet on enhancing the position of Turkey in the Islamic world, and normalizing the relations among its countries after a break and a lack of concern by many of its countries, and an estrangement with some of them, so Oglu has launched his theory about zero hostilities with the neighborhood, depending on strategy which is higher than politics, but he avoided to say that as long as we failed in joining the European Union,  so why not to try to enter in the Islamic World, but it was proven from the successive facts that the matter was not a strategy but a policy, because the good relationships did not last but for few years, and they were replaced with enmities with all the neighbors from Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Russia.

We witness in this stage a similar phenomenon even for different reasons and in different conditions, there are many political leaders who issued positions that have strategic impact rather than politics they give what is beyond the direct position, in order to make them symbolic theoretical political basis that is subject to analysis and interpretation, but the reading of its context allows discovering the goal and revealing the meaning. When the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Nayef talked about a new equation for the Saudi politics that must depend on accepting the difficult concessions, and when the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said that the priority of Turkey in Syria is the unity of Syria, in addition when Avigdor Lieberman the Israeli extremist Minister of Military Affairs talked about the superiority of the unity of people to the unity of land, and when the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov gave an equation its basis is we will not allow the fall of Aleppo, so we have to read that what is  between the lines is a drawing of decisive equations and qualitative shifts in politics that will rule the next stage. These titles are accompanied with coverage of practical steps that are going along with them.

Bin Nayef did not mean by the difficult concessions neither the internal relations in the ruling family nor the prices in the oil market, nor the plan which was spent for its promotion for the Crown Crown Prince more than its revenues under the slogan of the plan of the year 2030, but it was clear in context that the failure has affected the Saudi policies and what is required is a review that ends with the acceptance of presenting difficult concessions. His talk about Syria and Yemen was direct, especially about the failure in overthrowing the Syrian President, but not beholding the King and his son the responsibility of this failure , but because of what he described as non-performing of the American and the Turkish allies of the guarantees which they presented , but the concessions are difficult as a vocabulary that is uttered by the major countries under the slogan of keeping the stability and claiming the position of the responsible, this will hide something great, it is the decision to be open to the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad as a correction of the error of breaking up the relation, which the Russians sponsored a year ago. Who is reading between lines will discover the meaning.

When Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu talked about the priority of the unity of Syria for Turkey, he did not mean a debate with the proposed project by opponents of Syria which its title is the division of Syria, but he meant the speech of Turkey for itself, that the previous priority which is the priority of overthrowing the Syrian President is no longer valid, he said implicitly that it is no longer useful to stick to this priority, but the avoidance of the threat of Kurdish privacy on the Turkish Syrian borders is the intended by the symbolism of the presence of new priority that proceeds what  follows, entitled the unity of Syria to justify the fall of that priority which ruled the Turkish politics for five years. For those who do not understand, Oğlu presents the explanations by saying: this requires the close cooperation between Russia and Iran. Russia and Iran constitutes the real alliance which has an interest in protecting the unity of Syria and preventing its division. Thus the normal question becomes; do you mean Mr. Oğlu that the understanding with Russia and Iran on the basis of the unified Syria under the Presidency of Bashar Al-Assad is better than a divided Syria or an influence of the Kurds without the Syrian President? The answer is surely yes, the outcome is a gradual Turkish positioning towards Russia and Iran in preparation for the descending from the tree which the hanging on its branches lasted for long time which its title was the war on the Syrian presidency and the Syrian President.

Avigdor Lieberman addressed his followers about the choices, he talked about the priority of the unity of the people to the unity of the land, but the Israelis have not to choose between them since the matter is not present yet, but Lieberman addressed his followers whom the settlers constitute their majority and said that the political storms are surrounding Israel and its future, so they will not allow preserving the unity on the land or the people. This means that the coming stage requires the waiver of some of the geography which the settlers occupy and dismantling their settlements to preserve the future of the entity, and that this inability to maintain of what he calls the unity of land; the affliction of abandoning of some of the geography of the settlement especially in the Palestinian territory must be surpassed by achieving the unity of people which means accommodating settlers and compensating them. Here Lieberman presents the large slogan of the plan which will form the coming policy in the bazaars of settlements which Israel finds in it the only insurance policy if Syria recovers and its allies lose the war.

Sergei Lavorv the Russian Foreign Minister who has led a long political process with the Americans about Syria, and whose speech remained direct and specific step by step about the politics, negotiation, field, and truce, has talked about the things in their names saying that we have informed the Americans that we will stand with the Syrian army in order to prevent the fall of Aleppo, this does not make any sense  in diplomacy because the diplomatic notification among the super powers in particular does not need an announcement, Lavrov talked on the eve of the launch of the wide military campaign that is led by the Syrian army on several fronts, and after many terms which Moscow has accepted to provide the opportunity of disengagement between the armed groups which are sponsored by Washington and its allies and between Al Nusra Front, that we will no longer tolerate with using the terms which we presented for the preparation for the war of Al Nusra against Syria and the allies, we will be in the field, there will be no longer terms, no place for politics, the field will prove and Russia will be where it should be.

In the decisive crucial stages the political phrase rises to the level of strategy in order to justify the major wars or the major settlements that pave the way for the great victory or for painful concessions.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,