There are concerns that the Israeli's target might have been a secret nuclear reactor, and that it only remained to load it with nuclear fuel to make it work. The nuclear watchdog's experts are also expected to evaluate Syria's nuclear capability in general.
Much depends on this visit, but perhaps the biggest question of all is whether Syria will be able to reverse its recent descent into international isolation, or become a second Iran?
Israeli and U.S. officials periodically accuse Syria of developing a military nuclear program, but the IAEA has so far preferred to overlook such statements, especially since it received no incriminating evidence. Its officials have admitted that Israel's attack on the Syrian Al-Kibar facility last September came as a complete surprise.
They were equally stunned by an American intelligence report sent to the IAEA Secretariat last April, which described the destroyed nuclear facility as a nuclear reactor built with North Korean assistance. Reports have appeared in the American media claiming that U.S. intelligence has found another three nuclear installations and reported them to the IAEA, but there is no evidence to support this.
In a recent interview with Der Spiegel, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei complained that the agency received "too little information, and too late." He added that the IAEA had access only to the pictures of the destroyed building before and after the air strike. Now experts want to establish what it was - a nuclear reactor, as the Israelis and Americans maintain, or an ordinary military facility, as the Syrians initially reported.
Recently, Damascus announced that the strike was dealt at an unused plot of land belonging to the inter-Arab research association on agricultural development. These accounts are contradictory. Hopefully IAEA experts will be able to tell the difference between the ruins of a nuclear reactor and an agricultural plot.
Damascus has promised to assist the guests from Vienna in every possible way. Moreover, Syrian President Bashar al-Asad claims it was the Syrians themselves who invited the IAEA experts and let them visit the area that was bombed by Israel. But three other facilities, mentioned in the U.S. report, will be closed to inspectors. The Syrian president said that the agreement with the IAEA does not provide for inspections based on media reports. That is a reasonable argument, and any country would do the same. But are these really just newspaper publications, or have IAEA inspectors received classified information from the United States?
For the time being, the nuclear watchdog is optimistic about Damascus. A few days before the experts arrived in Syria, Mr. ElBaradei told the Al-Arabia TV channel that Syria does not have the potential to build a nuclear system. He said that the IAEA has no evidence that Syria is capable of implementing a nuclear program and acquiring nuclear fuel.
Mr. ElBaredei's upbeat attitude suggests that the inspection in Syria is no more than a routine inspection to end the rumors around Syria's supposed nuclear program. But will this satisfy Israel and the United States? A month ago, Washington declared that it insists on verifying all Syria's nuclear-related activities. In other words, the inspectors should not limit themselves to simply checking the bombed site. So, the Syrian nuclear question may turn into a long saga, as it did in Iran and North Korea.
But this is not in the interests of Damascus, which has recently done everything possible in order to break out of international isolation. Syria was accused of engineering the assassination of Lebanese former Primer Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005. It was charged with interference in Lebanese domestic affairs, primarily, for obstructing the settlement of a political crisis in Lebanon. But since the Lebanese president was elected, European and Arab countries have markedly changed their attitude towards Syria. This applies to France, above all. In the middle of June, the Syrian minister of culture visited Paris for the first time in three years. In July, President al-Asad is expected to attend a founding summit of a Mediterranean Union in France.
Damascus has not yet confirmed its participation in this event because the Israeli leaders, most likely President Shimon Peres, are also going to attend. In the meantime, French President Nicolas Sarkozy has already announced that his Syrian and Israeli counterparts will sit at one and the same negotiating table. If this happens, it will be an unprecedented achievement. Until recently the Syrians avoided taking part in any event attended by Israelis, even at the lowest level. Now the situation is gradually changing, but the top leaders of the two countries have not yet been at the same table.
However, they are not obliged to conduct dialogue, although Nobel Peace Prize winner Peres may take extraordinary steps, especially since Syria and Israel have recently resumed indirect peace talks. They are planning to hold the next round of these talks next month. Then why shouldn't they coincide with the Paris summit? But this is speculation. Syrian-Israeli talks have only just started, and nobody knows whether they will score any success in the near future.
President al-Asad is not likely to miss a chance to visit Paris. His refusal to do so will be insulting for his French counterpart, Sarkozy, who is dreaming of a Mediterranean Union. Syria's relations with France and the rest of the EU have just started to improve, and it is not in its interests to spoil them, especially considering the problems that could arise from its alleged nuclear program. Although for the time being they are not likely to develop on the Iranian scale, they may still be a headache for Damascus, and could further complicate its already difficult talks with Israel, and its position in the world in general.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
