Dennis Ross: Israel Should Talk to Syria

Too often the Bush administration has treated "talking" as if it means conceding. But talks are not synonymous with surrender. Rather, they can be a way of exercising leverage. Consider one of the current realities in the Middle East: Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas all refuse to recognize Israel; all suggest that peace need not and should not be made with Israel; all reject a two state solution; and all claim to represent the wave of the future. What does it say about their position and their claims if Syria -- supposedly a part of their nexus -- is opting out and talking to Israel? Doesn't it suggest that, in fact, their position is not so dominant and that everything is not going their way?

Statecraft requires recognizing where one has leverage and where one's adversaries have vulnerabilities. Syria's relationship with Iran and Hezbollah is tactical not strategic. There is no guarantee that by talking, the Israelis -- or the United States -- will suddenly be able to wean Syria away from Iran or Hezbollah. It is entirely possible that neither the Israelis nor the United States can or should pay what Syria wants. But if war is an increasing possibility and if there is tactical benefit in demonstrating that even Syria feels the need to talk to Israel, it is hard to see what is lost by doing so.
Dennis Ross in the New Republic: Talk to Syria