Israel’s intervention in the Syrian conflict has been described by Syria’s deputy foreign minister as “a declaration of war.” He’s right! Israel has not only aggressed on Syria unprovoked, Israeli jets have invaded Lebanese air space to launch attacks.
Israel has come up with the pretext that it will not tolerate the transfer of sophisticated weapons to Tehran’s proxy Hezbollah, which is engaged with Iran on the Assad regime’s side. That excuse doesn’t ring true when Hezbollah is currently preoccupied with fighting anti-regime forces rather than Israel and Hezbollah is long-believed to hold an impressive armory of guided missiles capable of reaching Israeli cities.
In any event, the IAF’s strike on a military research facility that killed up to 300 members of the Syrian Army (the third of three attacks on Syria since January), on Sunday morning doesn’t fit the bill. Syria’s Foreign Ministry has accused Israel of coordinating with “terrorists” including Al-Qaeda. That’s unlikely, but it can’t be denied that both Israel and Al-Qaeda are in the odd position of battling the same enemy. Even stranger is Israel’s eagerness to see Assad toppled when for decades, enemy or not, he’s behaved like an annoying gnat biting at the Jewish state’s heels.
Bashar Assad and his father before him, during the later part of his presidency, were aware of their limits and restricted their attacks on Israel to rhetoric. If Assad goes, his successor is likely to be drawn from the Muslim Brotherhood and if he is inclined to join forces with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere in the region, could ultimately represent a more effective foe than Assad.
So what is Benjamin Netanyahu up to? Reports suggest that Israel’s action was unilateral. A US intelligence official has disclosed that Washington wasn’t pre-warned and was only informed about the air raids in Syria “after the fact.” If that’s true, then Israel is clearly attempting to drag the United States into a conflict that could escalate and involve Iran. If you recall, Netanyahu has unsuccessfully tried to get America’s green light to attack Iran’s nuclear sites for years.
Until now, President Obama has been unwilling to commit because he has little appetite to ignite yet another US-led conflagration in the Middle East and also due to the involvement of Jabhat Al-Nusra that the US has declared is a terrorist organization as well as Al-Qaeda-linked elements in the opposition camp. Recently, US Secretary of State Chuck Hagel said while Washington is mulling arming the opposition, the US is concerned that those weapons could fall into the hands of anti-American radicals.
Obama has announced his red line, which is Assad’s use of chemical weapons, but if that occurred, it is believed to have been limited—and in any case, it cannot be proven due to chemical degradation. It’s worth mentioning the recent revelation of United Nations investigator Carla Del Ponte who told Swiss TV that there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof that fighters have used the nerve agent Sarin” and, therefore, they can’t claim clean hands either.
What’s certain is that Netanyahu’s aggression toward the Syrian military has nothing to do with altruistic or humanitarian concerns. Clearly, the Israelis have a plan, one that benefits their own interests. The Syrian quagmire may be seen from Israel’s perspective as the perfect opportunity to hobble Hezbollah or even to take the war to Tehran. Alternatively, they have studied the day after Assad’s exit when there is likely to be a bloodbath with revenge attacks and sectarian conflicts looming.
As long ago as 1982, Oded Yinon, a journalist attached to Israel’s Foreign Ministry set out Israel’s ambitions in a paper that was published in the World Zionist’s publication Kivunim (Directions). “The dissolution of Syria and Iraq” into “religiously unique areas” is “Israel’s primary target on the eastern front in the long run.” He predicted that “Syria will fall apart in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure into several states . . . so that there will be a Shiite Alawite state along its cost, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druze will set up a state, maybe even on our Golan . . .”
If that was Israel’s aim more than 30 years ago, then there’s reason to believe that it still is. Divide and rule was—and is—the tried and true method by which the US and Britain dominated the region since the 1916 Arab Revolt when Sherif Hussein bin Ali was conned into taking up arms against the Ottomans on the promise of an independent Arab state. Arabs have been betrayed and lied-to by the West over and over again, which is why to outsiders it seems incomprehensible how Arab leaderships could consider Washington as a friend, especially after the Iraq debacle that gifted an Arab heartland to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Today, the White House predictably refuses to condemn Israel’s illegal attacks on Syria, with the usual diplomatic-speak that Israel has the right to defend itself.
To date Assad hasn’t chosen to retaliate to Israel’s attacks. After all, he’s got enough on his plate as is and his military is in no shape to take on Israel. Moreover, he has few allies left in the Arab world. But his choices will be limited if strikes continue and worsen. Israel is preparing for that eventuality by deploying iron dome anti-missile batteries in Haifa and Safed.
I suspect that Netanyahu is hoping that Assad will hit back. This is looking more like a trap each day. It seems to me that Arab leaders should set aside their differences with the Syrian government and come together with one voice to urge the US and the United Nations to restrain Israeli adventurism that could have unintended consequences for the entire area. If Arabs won’t take the wheel to drive their future, Israel will do so—and if victorious will leave Arabs everywhere wondering “who’s next?”
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.
RSS
Israeli raids on Syria a game-changer
Posted on May 8, 2013 by Linda S. Heard
Israel’s intervention in the Syrian conflict has been described by Syria’s deputy foreign minister as “a declaration of war.” He’s right! Israel has not only aggressed on Syria unprovoked, Israeli jets have invaded Lebanese air space to launch attacks.
Israel has come up with the pretext that it will not tolerate the transfer of sophisticated weapons to Tehran’s proxy Hezbollah, which is engaged with Iran on the Assad regime’s side. That excuse doesn’t ring true when Hezbollah is currently preoccupied with fighting anti-regime forces rather than Israel and Hezbollah is long-believed to hold an impressive armory of guided missiles capable of reaching Israeli cities.
In any event, the IAF’s strike on a military research facility that killed up to 300 members of the Syrian Army (the third of three attacks on Syria since January), on Sunday morning doesn’t fit the bill. Syria’s Foreign Ministry has accused Israel of coordinating with “terrorists” including Al-Qaeda. That’s unlikely, but it can’t be denied that both Israel and Al-Qaeda are in the odd position of battling the same enemy. Even stranger is Israel’s eagerness to see Assad toppled when for decades, enemy or not, he’s behaved like an annoying gnat biting at the Jewish state’s heels.
Bashar Assad and his father before him, during the later part of his presidency, were aware of their limits and restricted their attacks on Israel to rhetoric. If Assad goes, his successor is likely to be drawn from the Muslim Brotherhood and if he is inclined to join forces with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere in the region, could ultimately represent a more effective foe than Assad.
So what is Benjamin Netanyahu up to? Reports suggest that Israel’s action was unilateral. A US intelligence official has disclosed that Washington wasn’t pre-warned and was only informed about the air raids in Syria “after the fact.” If that’s true, then Israel is clearly attempting to drag the United States into a conflict that could escalate and involve Iran. If you recall, Netanyahu has unsuccessfully tried to get America’s green light to attack Iran’s nuclear sites for years.
Until now, President Obama has been unwilling to commit because he has little appetite to ignite yet another US-led conflagration in the Middle East and also due to the involvement of Jabhat Al-Nusra that the US has declared is a terrorist organization as well as Al-Qaeda-linked elements in the opposition camp. Recently, US Secretary of State Chuck Hagel said while Washington is mulling arming the opposition, the US is concerned that those weapons could fall into the hands of anti-American radicals.
Obama has announced his red line, which is Assad’s use of chemical weapons, but if that occurred, it is believed to have been limited—and in any case, it cannot be proven due to chemical degradation. It’s worth mentioning the recent revelation of United Nations investigator Carla Del Ponte who told Swiss TV that there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof that fighters have used the nerve agent Sarin” and, therefore, they can’t claim clean hands either.
What’s certain is that Netanyahu’s aggression toward the Syrian military has nothing to do with altruistic or humanitarian concerns. Clearly, the Israelis have a plan, one that benefits their own interests. The Syrian quagmire may be seen from Israel’s perspective as the perfect opportunity to hobble Hezbollah or even to take the war to Tehran. Alternatively, they have studied the day after Assad’s exit when there is likely to be a bloodbath with revenge attacks and sectarian conflicts looming.
As long ago as 1982, Oded Yinon, a journalist attached to Israel’s Foreign Ministry set out Israel’s ambitions in a paper that was published in the World Zionist’s publication Kivunim (Directions). “The dissolution of Syria and Iraq” into “religiously unique areas” is “Israel’s primary target on the eastern front in the long run.” He predicted that “Syria will fall apart in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure into several states . . . so that there will be a Shiite Alawite state along its cost, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druze will set up a state, maybe even on our Golan . . .”
If that was Israel’s aim more than 30 years ago, then there’s reason to believe that it still is. Divide and rule was—and is—the tried and true method by which the US and Britain dominated the region since the 1916 Arab Revolt when Sherif Hussein bin Ali was conned into taking up arms against the Ottomans on the promise of an independent Arab state. Arabs have been betrayed and lied-to by the West over and over again, which is why to outsiders it seems incomprehensible how Arab leaderships could consider Washington as a friend, especially after the Iraq debacle that gifted an Arab heartland to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Today, the White House predictably refuses to condemn Israel’s illegal attacks on Syria, with the usual diplomatic-speak that Israel has the right to defend itself.
To date Assad hasn’t chosen to retaliate to Israel’s attacks. After all, he’s got enough on his plate as is and his military is in no shape to take on Israel. Moreover, he has few allies left in the Arab world. But his choices will be limited if strikes continue and worsen. Israel is preparing for that eventuality by deploying iron dome anti-missile batteries in Haifa and Safed.
I suspect that Netanyahu is hoping that Assad will hit back. This is looking more like a trap each day. It seems to me that Arab leaders should set aside their differences with the Syrian government and come together with one voice to urge the US and the United Nations to restrain Israeli adventurism that could have unintended consequences for the entire area. If Arabs won’t take the wheel to drive their future, Israel will do so—and if victorious will leave Arabs everywhere wondering “who’s next?”
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.