WASHINGTON // The Obama administration has been wary of siding with the protesters in Syria while the situation remains unpredictable, analysts say. But the reticence in the White House to stake out a clear position on the Syrian protests has been notable in view of the years of enmity between the two countries.
Bashar al Assad, the Syrian president, faces the most serious threat to Baath party rule since an 1982 Islamist rebellion in 1982 was violently put down by his father, Hafez al Assad.
The US considers Syria a serial human-rights abuser and accuses it of supporting terrorist activities. Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, cast Bashar al Assad as a "reformer" in an interview in late March. While Mrs Clinton backtracked a little a few days later, saying she was referencing the opinions of politicians who have visited Damascus, the tone on Syria has generally been muted.
In part, say analysts, this is a result of events elsewhere in the region consuming the administration. It is also a result of the confluence of competing interests in Syria.
Damascus has good relations with Iran and Hizbollah. It plays an important role in neighbouring Lebanon, hosts Palestinian Islamist movements, and has taken in large numbers of Iraqi refugees while intermittently being accused of allowing militants to flow through the other way.
Israel is understood to be wary of serious instability in Syria, concerns that will factor into any US calculations. The Obama administration has also been engaged in a years-long effort to improve relations with Damascus, in January deploying a US ambassador for the first time since 2005.
Mark Perry, an independent Washington-based political analyst, said: "I think the truth is the administration doesn't know what to do.
"We've beaten up on the Syrians for a long time, but now that they are in danger, it's no longer that clear."
As in Egypt, any evolving US response is likely to be determined by how much momentum the protests against political arrests and emergency rule that have swept the country since mid-March can garner. The demonstrations have already prompted the resignation of the Syrian cabinet and saw Mr al Assad promise reform.
But the Syrian leader has adopted a stick-and-carrot approach. In a speech to the nation on March 30, he struck a confrontational rather than conciliatory tone, blaming foreign conspirators for the unrest.
Security forces have reacted with tear gas, batons, bullets and clubs. More than a hundred people have been killed in the unrest, according to human rights organisations.
The administration has condemned the crackdown in Syria and called for an end to the violence. But the White House was quick to rule out any libya-style military option and has instead urged the Syrian government to make good on promises of reform. Beyond that, Jay Carney, the White House spokesman, told reporters on April 1 that it was "premature" to talk about "policy options".
That is in no small part because the administration remains sceptical that the protests have enough of a momentum to seriously threaten the Syrian regime, said Andrew Tabler of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
"The administration is dealing with the [regional developments] very much on a country-by-country basis," Mr Tabler said. "Now, I think it's one of these things that depends on what happens in two respects: one is if Assad follows through on his promises to make some changes, or reforms as he calls it, and if that is enough for people to go home and stop protesting."
Moreover, the Obama administration has worked hard to improve relations with Syria after the country was vilified as a pariah by the Bush administration, efforts that culminated with the deployment of Richard Ford, the US ambassador, in January.
Stephen McInerney of the Washington-based Project for Middle East Democracy said: "Since very early on in President Obama's tenure, there has been an effort to reach out to Syria and improve relations, largely the job of the US ambassador, Richard Ford,. "I think the momentum of that effort probably is slowing any sort of very outspoken critical public response."
Republican politicians, notably John Thune, the fourth-ranking Republican in the US Senate, called on the Obama administration to withdraw Ambassador Ford "immediately".
But the lack of a diplomatic presence in part explains the current US predicament, Mr Perry said. After years with no significant representation in the country, the US has no clear idea of who the opposition is nor any ability to influence events, as Washington had in Egypt. That leaves too much room for uncertainty.
"Partly the problem is, what's next? We just don't know. And we also don't have any leverage over it. If the US sides with the protesters, it is somehow responsible for what comes next. And the US can't side with the regime."
