Indeed, the administration is standing its ground on the matter of arming the Syrian rebels. For Turkey and Qatar, who were closely involved in the creation of the Syrian National Coalition, the purpose behind this unified opposition front boils down to pressing Washington to agree to provide advanced lethal assistance and to establish a no-fly zone along the border with Turkey.
The first thing the head of the new Syrian coalition called for was "specialized weapons" -- a reference to anti-air systems to counter the Assad regime's airpower. Similarly, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu indicated that this was Ankara's primary concern when he called on the members of the Friends of Syria group to "be more active," adding that with the new unity agreement, "there is no excuse anymore."
Obviously, Davutoglu was directing his statement at the Obama administration, whose excuse for months had been that the Syrian opposition's fragmentation precluded more U.S. involvement.
Yet it is precisely on this central point of military aid that the U.S. position remains unchanged. Remarkably, all recent assertions in the media about a shift in the U.S. approach ran against consistent and explicit statements to the contrary from administration officials, both immediately before and after the election. For instance, in October, the US Ambassador to Turkey Francis Ricciardone relayed to the Turks that "no matter what the election results, I do not believe there will be a change in perspective [on Syria]."
The administration also ruled out last month any prospect of supplying the opposition with shoulder-fired anti-air missiles, and was reportedly startled when the British prime minister, David Cameron, floated the possibility of opening the door to arming the rebels last week.
And just in case anyone didn't get the point, in its statement following the formation of the Syrian National Coalition, the State Department made sure to underline that assistance from the U.S. will continue to be of the "non-lethal" variety.
As for the second main demand of a no-fly zone, during the opposition gathering in Doha, the administration's point man on Syria, Ambassador Robert Ford, reportedly emphasized to the rebels-and to their regional backers -- that they should not expect any change in the administration's position on that front.
In the end, therefore, despite leaks regarding a review process of the Syria policy, the pre-election dynamic continues unaltered: U.S. regional allies continue to maneuver to push Washington toward more involvement, while the administration continues to insist on staying out of the game.
Barring an extraordinary development, it seems U.S. policy will remain unchanged for the foreseeable future, to the dismay of U.S. allies who hoped the election would make a difference.
