The Role Of Israel In Syria: All Possibilities - But One - Would Serve Israel
24 January 2013
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed
The war in Syria is also a concern for Israel, and its
results may be as significant as the October 1973 war.
The fall of Bashar Al-Assad's regime could change the
political map and perhaps threaten the existing
balance of power formulated after the disengagement
agreement signed by President Hafez Al-Assad and
Israel, under Henry Kissinger's auspices, during the
October war.
Syria is the second largest neighboring country to
Israel after Egypt, and despite the Golan Height's
stability, Syria has never signed a peace
treaty-citing Lebanon as a factor in its decision-and
is the only neighboring country with a sizeable
arsenal of chemical and biological weapons.
During the first year of the Syrian revolution,
Israelis did not believe that Assad's resilient regime
would collapse. However, since early last year, the
Israelis have begun believe that Assad's fall is now
inevitable. With the Syrian president's downfall, the
Israelis will lose a ?wise enemy? and a loyal guard,
but just as strong as their fear is their growing
appetite to influence the final result.
With the fall of Bashar Assad, Israel fears the
unknown and as a result is keenly monitoring what is
happening on the war fronts in Syria on a daily basis.
These Israeli concerns alone are justified and
expected, but it would be going too far to attempt to
redraw the Syrian map. I do not think that it would be
erroneous to say that Israel supports the idea of
establishing an Alawite state that Assad is planning
along the Mediterranean coast, or several other
mini-states for that matter. Israel does not care
about a civil war inside Syria, but rather encourages
it, and a war between the Syrians would be expected if
Assad tried to fragment the country and take over a
particular region.
Israel is always interested in preoccupying its Arab
neighbors in civil wars, and it is surely interested
in dismantling Syria into small Kurdish, Alawite,
Christian, Druze and Sunni mini-states. But isn't
Israel afraid of the presence of Al-Qaeda in a
collapsed Syria? The idea itself is scary but Al-Qaeda
is the bogeyman of the West, not Israel. Al-Qaeda has
avoided confrontation with the Israelis despite its
numerous anti-Semitic rants. Israel knows that none of
Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, Hamas, or even the previous
Palestinian red factions such as Abu Nidal and the
Popular Front, are threatening its security; they are
merely a nuisance. The balance of power is always in
Israel's favor as the Jewish state always wins the war
in the end. Israel has fortified itself through
building secure borders; it has constructed a long
fence separating it off from the West Bank and will
build a similar structure with Egypt. It will also
build the ?Great Wall of Israel? in the Golan Heights,
separating it from Syria.
Tel Aviv has not released any information or
suggestion regarding the situation in Syria, but we
know that this is the most serious affront on its
borders and that it directly affects Israeli security.
Therefore, it is impossible for Israel to stand still,
but little has been said so far. However, after his
return from Russia, Israeli president Shimon Peres
previously said that the Israelis were against any
form of foreign military intervention but would
support the proposal to send Arab troops to enforce
peace in Syria. Peres certainly knows that
international intervention would take one week to
topple Assad's regime, whereas Arab intervention would
make the war last for years. The absurd notion of
sending Arab troops-also recommended by Arab
League-doesn't identity which Arab troops in
particular, or how they would be sent.
I imagine that Israel has influenced Western and
Russian stances in dealing with the events in Syria.
It is probably behind the decline in their interest
and threats towards the Assad regime. For the
Israelis, there are four possibilities to end the
Syrian tragedy: Firstly, the regime could fall with an
alternative, exhausted ruling system being established
by the opposition in its place, on what remains of
Syria's destroyed and scorched land. The second
possibility is for the regime to fall while the civil
war continues and without a strong central government
to replace it, in a manner similar to Somalia. The
third possibility is that Assad and his entourage will
flee to the coast and declare the establishment and
annexation of an Alawite mini-state, thus ensuring the
continuation of inter-Syrian conflict. The final
possibility, which is unlikely to happen, is that the
situation will remain as it is and Assad will stay in
Damascus while the opposition fight against him; with
no visible end to the deadlock.
All of these possibilities would serve Israel. The
only option that would have been contrary to Israeli
interests was the proposal of international
intervention a year ago, overthrowing Assad's regime
and establishing a new one based on democracy with
international support. Israel knows that this would
have made Syria a stronger neighbor, given that it has
a population three times larger than Israel's and
especially if its regime were endorsed by a popular
mandate.
Al
Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of
Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in
the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is
a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He
has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs.
He is currently based in Dubai.From Consul To Terrorist: The Only Faction Active oOn The Scene Because Everybody Else Has Left The Arena :: EsinIslam The Muslim World Portal For Islamic News And Opinions
From Consul To Terrorist: The Only Faction Active oOn The Scene Because Everybody Else Has Left The Arena
14 January 2013
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed
As soon as I heard the name Iyad Ag Ghaly in relation
to the events in Mali I began to wonder if this could
be the same man from the same country? Could it really
be him? Iyad Ag Ghaly heads up the military operations
of armed terrorist groups in northern Mali; whilst
there was a man with the same name who served as
Mali's consul in Jeddah. I called some friends and
confirmed that Iyad Ag Ghaly is indeed the same man
that I met at Jeddah's Hilton hotel less than three
years ago.
We are facing a truly strange world where those who
are legitimate today could be fugitives tomorrow.
At the time, I knew-from those who had dealt with
Ghaly as a Tuareg tribal chief and diplomatic
consul-that he was the best source to find
intermediaries to negotiate the release of hostages
taken in the Azawad region. Now, he is said to be
commander of the Ansar Dine movement fighting the
Malian army, as well as international French and
African forces.
When I read a profile about him in yesterday's Asharq
al-Awsat newspaper, I was even more confused, for this
stated that he was close to Libyan dictator Muammar
Qadhafi who reportedly sent him to fight in Lebanon.
Yet, Ghaly only recently displayed extremist
tendencies.
This kind of confusion and uncertainty has become
quite common as shown by the emergence of extremists
like Tarek al-Zomor and Mohamed al-Zawahiri on Egypt's
political scene. So how did a man like Iyad Ag Ghaly
turn from being a moderate Sunni Muslim to an
extremist armed fighter? Is it rational to suppose
that a man in his fifties, like Ghaly, should suddenly
become radicalized? This is truly hard to believe. I
sense that this may be some kind of political maneuver
where politicians have pretended to adopt extremist
ideologies in order to recruit impulsive youths. These
politicians provide these youth with funding under the
pretext of ?religious duty?, convincing them to
sacrifice their lives for a false cause in return for
a place in heaven! Since there is a general
international lack of will to fight anywhere in the
world, the French-alongside a few African states-will
fight this war on their own before realizing that
desert wars never end and withdraw. What makes matters
more complicated is that conflicts that involve
religious slogans and tribal powers can last for
decades without any side being defeated.
Our problem with those who are keen on fighting these
extremists, like the French today and the Americans
yesterday in Afghanistan and perhaps tomorrow in
Syria, is their inability to understand the
fundamental nature of the problem. These extremist
groups represent the smallest part of the equation;
rather the greatest and most important challenge is to
confront extremist ideologies. Had the West, as well
as the Arab countries involved and other relevant
parties invested their money and effort in fighting
extremist ideologies, this crisis might have come to
an end. Instead they spent billions of dollars on tens
of thousands of soldiers, advanced weaponry, and
combat drones managing to eliminate a number of Al
Qaeda's leaders; however Al Qaeda's ideology remains
the same and in fact continues to spread like a
disease. Most people find it easier to jump to easy
conclusions by laying the blame on one group or
another like Sunnis, Shi'ites, clerics, or even
religion as a whole; however all these groups were
present prior to this and were never a source of
trouble.
We are living in a different world in which political
powers are establishing and nourishing extremist
ideologies and generations. These politicians have the
project, the expertise, and the will to propagate such
extremist ideology and they are practically immune to
punishment because the wrong parties are always held
accountable. Who could have imagined that Mali would
become an international battlefield after Afghanistan?
The West is repeating the same mistake in Syria by
allowing it to fall prey to extremists who are
emotionally manipulate the general public under the
pretext that they are their only source of salvation
from the tyranny of the Assad regime. In reality, they
are the only faction active on the scene because
everybody else has left the arena.
Al
Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of
Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in
the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is
a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He
has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs.
He is currently based in Dubai.