WarSclerotic

Time for Israel to do a little warmongering in Syria – Opinion – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Only by convincing Assad and his allies that Israel is actually itching for a fight can we successfully deter Syrian retribution, now and in the future.

Rebels burn photo of Syrian President Bashar Assad. Photo by Reuters

In the past 48 hours, Israeli officials have gone to great lengths to emphasize that Israel is not interested in escalating the conflict with Syria. Israel is not coming to the aid of the rebels, officials stress, but rather is only attempting to prevent strategic arms transfers to Hezbollah (pursuant to UN Security Council resolution 1701).

Yet the constant refrain that “Israel is not interested in escalation” will only guarantee… right, further escalation.

How so? It is hard to take issue with the assessment that Assad is too busy with his domestic opponents to divert most of his armed forces to an all-out war with Israel. Hezbollah, too, is wading neck-deep in the Syrian civil conflict, its fighters taking substantial casualties in the process, and so it is also in no position to rehash the 2006 Second Lebanon War.

The problem is that Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria may all conclude that they could get away with a very limited strike on Israel—perhaps firing a few long-range missiles to score a few points domestically and regionally—and then with lightning speed try to issue their own version of “Syria is not interested in escalation.” Given that Israel, like its adversaries, is really not itching for a fight, such a calculation may be accurate. As a result, instead of Assad just taking the airstrikes “on the chin” (as he has done for years), this time it could end with Israel suffering a few Syrian missiles and then having to “turn the other cheek.”

There is a way to deter Syrian retribution: Start to realize (out loud, that is) that this might actually be an opportune moment to provoke a war.

One day, we should remember, the Syrian civil war will end and our two immutable nemeses will re-coup. In the meantime, however, two years of bloody fighting have left both Syria and Hezbollah at their weakest point in the past decade, if not longer.

Moreover, given the endless atrocities committed by the Assad regime in the past two years, the Syrian opposition is not about to “rally ‘round the flag”—even in the case of a war with Israel. In fact, if Israel were to use its air force and anti-aircraft capacities to set up a no-fly zone in Syria’s south, it might make Syrians question long-held assumptions and create an opening for a new kind of relationship with the future Sunni regime in Damascus.

In Lebanon as well, Hezbollah is walking on egg shells. Lebanese Sunnis, Christians and others have long been far outgunned and organizationally outmatched by Hezbollah. These communities’ impotence was laid bare during Hezbollah’s lightening ‘mock takeover’ of Western portions of Beirut during two days in May 2008. But now, as Lebanese Sunnis also have begun taking part in the battle for Syria, their capacities for fighting will continue to grow, precisely as Hezbollah’s are weakening.

Regionally and globally as well, the Assad regime’s atrocities have eliminated what little legitimacy the autocratic regime once possessed. This is especially true following its small-scale use of chemical weapons against its own citizens over the past few months. When taken with the West’s continued inaction, there would be more than a few citizens in the wider neighborhood who might actually cheer Israel on. Wide-scale Israeli military action in Syria would, with a big public wink from Washington, would also help Obama out of his predicament about how to respond to Assad’s crossing his big red-line.

In short, this might be a once in a generation opportunity to destroy two of our eternal foes, and it is time to start thinking about how to take advantage of this situation to forever secure our northern border.

Or, at least, this is the signal we should be transmitting to Assad and Nasrallah. Instead of the mindless mantra “Israel is not interested in escalation,” the only way to actually prevent further conflict is to convince Assad and Nasrallah that Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon is actually a reincarnation of Ariel Sharon, vintage 1982.

The paradoxical bottom line: only by convincing Assad and his allies that Israel is actually itching for a fight can we successfully deter Syrian retribution, now and in the future. If, on the other hand, Israel continues to stress that it only wants to return to quiet, this only encourages Assad to engage in small-scale retaliation.

Cameron S. Brown is Neubauer Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), Tel Aviv University.

Palestinian militants in Syria: Assad grants green light to attack Israel – Diplomacy & Defense – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Anwar Raja of the Damascus-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command says it received nod from regime to strike Israeli targets from the Syrian-controlled part of Golan Heights.

Smoke rises after shells fired by the Syrian army explode in the Syrian village of Bariqa, close to the cease-fire line between Israel and Syria, Nov. 12, 2012. Photo by AP

A spokesman for a Palestinian militant group in Syria says it has received a nod from President Bashar Assad‘s regime to attack Israel following the back-to-back Israeli airstrikes over the weekend.

Anwar Raja of the Damascus-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command says the regime has given “a green light” for the group “to attack Israeli targets” from the Syrian-controlled part of Golan Heights.

Raja did not elaborate on how the alleged approval was conveyed to PFLP-GC fighters but he stressed that there was no official government note. The Palestinian official spoke to The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Most Palestinians in Syria remained on the sidelines of the 2-year-old conflict, but PFLP-GC has fought alongside government troops against the rebels trying to topple Assad.

A mortar shell fired from Syria landed in the central Golan Heights on Tuesday morning, near the border fence in Tel Fares. There were no reports of casualties or damage.

The IDF said it was most likely an errant shell fired by one of the sides battling in Syria. The United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF ) stationed on the border has been notified.

Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is making his case to Russian President Vladimir Putin for Russia to take a tougher stance on Syria.

Kerry, who arrived in Moscow on Tuesday, is hoping to change Russia’s thinking on Syria with two new angles: American threats to arm the Syrian rebels and evidence of chemical weapon attacks by the Assad regime.

Russia, alongside China, has blocked U.S.-led efforts three times at the United Nations to pressure Assad into stepping down.

U.S. officials are hoping Syria’s behavior could shift Russia’s stance.
“We have consistently, in our conversations with the Russians and others, pointed clearly to Assad’s behavior as proof that further support for the regime is not in the interest of the Syrian people or in the interest of the countries that have in the past supported Assad,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

On Monday evening, two mortar shells were fired from Syria to Israel, and landed in an open area near the border fence. In this case too, the IDF notified UNDOF.

The Haifa airport which was closed on Sunday due to the tensions in northern Israel was reopened on Monday, and El Al and Arkia commercial flights are set to resume.

Without confirming foreign reports saying Israel was behind both attacks last Friday and Sunday, American officials said Monday morning that the U.S. received no early warning of the strikes. The New York Times quoted a Syrian official who claimed that the strike hit an elite military unit. A Syrian doctor told the paper that at least 100 soldiers were killed in the attack.

Erdogan: No justification for Israeli strikes in Syria | JPost | Israel News.

Juxtaposition of Israeli action and U.S. inaction on Syria puts more pressure on Obama – Diplomacy & Defense – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Damascus bombings highlight perception that Obama is walking away from red line that he drew in the Syrian sand. But if he acts and things go wrong, Israel will share the blame.

By Chemi Shalev | May.05, 2013 | 10:17 PM | 25

Israeli soldiers walking past signs pointing out distances to different cities at an observation point on Mount Bental in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights May 5, 2013. Photo by Reuters

The widespread American backing for the reported Israel Air Force bombings of Syrian targets has three central elements: 1. Deep support for Israel and understanding of its motives 2. Revulsion with President Bashar Assad and a feeling that he had it coming and 3. A certain delight, at least among President Obama’s foes, with the new opportunity to highlight what they perceive as his shameful inaction.

After all, while Obama examines, verifies, calculates and ponders the appropriate U.S. reaction to Assad’s reported use of chemical weapons, Israel is showing the kind of resolute decisiveness that his critics say the president so sorely lacks. “While Obama dithers – Israel acts,” was one such disparaging column published Sunday.

The very same people who claimed that Obama will turn his back at the first opportunity are now derisively portraying his unequivocal support for the alleged Israeli actions as further proof of his reviled “leading from behind” policy. And the apparent ease with which Israel succeeded in penetrating what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey has described as  the “dense and sophisticated” Syrian air defense systems has removed yet another obstacle – or excuse – for Administration’s idleness, as Republican Senator John McCain explained Sunday.

The dramatic videos and stills of thick columns of smoke and fire spouting from the mountains behind Damascus ensured that the reported Israeli raids on Damascus would receive top billing on the influential Sunday talk shows. The juxtaposition between the Israeli resoluteness and what was portrayed as Obama’s dilly-dallying fit in nicely with the current bon-ton inspection of whether the president is already a “lame duck”, so early in his second term, or will become one soon.

One should differentiate, though, between the personal, political and public persona challenges to Obama and their translation into practical actions on the ground. On a PR level, Obama is being portrayed as someone who drew a “red line in the sand” and is now trying to ignore it – and the disingenuous effort of some of his confidantes in the Sunday New York Times to retroactively describe it as an unintended off-the-cuff remark only makes matters worse. “Hoo lo gever” – he’s not a man – as Israelis would chauvinistically say, even in the eyes of those who aren’t sure of the wisdom or the necessity of an American military action.

U.S. public opinion, after all, is far from convinced that the U.S. should lend a helping hand to the Syrian rebels and is only slightly more favorable towards a military effort against Assad’s chemical arsenal. Even the most hawkish of Republican lawmakers are wary of a hasty decision to arm the rebels, lest “we replace one terrible dictator with a terrible ideological movement which is aimed at our destruction” as New York Congressman Peter King said Sunday. And everyone, but everyone, agrees that there should be no American “boots on the ground”, under almost any circumstances.

Americans are tired of the toll taken by Iraq and Afghanistan – 11 soldiers were killed over the last weekend alone – and are widely aware of the crippling economic burden that these two wars have placed on the U.S. economy for many years to come. Obama knows full well that public support for a campaign in Syria is limited – and that the same people who are now egging him on will be the first to blast him when things go wrong.

And if and when that time comes, rest assured, Israel will also be asked to explain how and why it got the U.S. embroiled in yet another Middle East quagmire. By then, the widespread support and universal applause for Israel’s initial forays into Syrian skies will be long gone and forgotten.

The lies we tell ourselves about modern Islam | JPost | Israel News.

US, allies to stage large naval exercise in Gulf | JPost | Israel News.

Israel and Turkey reach agreement to end rift | JPost | Israel News.

Israeli and Turkish officials reached a draft agreement to mend the three-year diplomatic crisis between the two countries, after a productive meeting at the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem on Monday.

Ankara broke off relations with Jerusalem in May 2010, after the IDF raided the Mavi Marmara shipas it attempted to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, killing nine Turkish activists on board.

“The two sides expect to come to an agreement in the near future,” said a statement released by the Prime Minister’s Office.

“The meeting was conducted in a good and positive manner. The delegations reached an agreed draft, but further clarifications are required on certain subjects,” the PMO said.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was in China when the meeting occurred.

National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror along with Joseph Ciechanover from the Prime Minister’s Office led the Israeli delegation.

The Foreign Ministry staff was not present, even though the meeting was held in their building, according to a diplomatic source.

Turkish Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioglu, a former Turkish ambassador to Israel, led his country’s delegation.

It was the highest level Turkish delegation to visit Israel in the last three years.

Their meeting lasted more than eight hours. It following an initial day-long meeting between the two delegations in Ankara in April.

That Turkish delegation was led by Deputy PM Bulent Arinc.

Israelis left Ankara hopeful progress had been made, and were even more optimistic on Monday.

In light of the growing threats from Syria and Iran, Israel and Turkey are looking to repair their severed relationship and normalize ties.

Ankara broke off relations with Jerusalem in May 2010, after the IDF raided the ship Mavi Marmara as it attempted to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, killing nine Turkish activists on board.

A March gesture by Netanyahu, in which he apologized to Turkey for the deaths, came at the tail end of a visit to Israel by United States President Barack Obama.

Netanyahu promised to conclude an “agreement on compensation/non-liability” with the families of the nine Turkish activists.

In April a compensation mechanism was agreed upon with Turkey. But no sums have publicized. It is understood that full reconciliation and the restoration or diplomatic ties will not be possible until compensation is agreed upon.

This reconciliation will include an exchange of ambassadors, as had existed in the past.

‘Shock and shush’ strategy, meant to mollify Assad, may have run its course | The Times of Israel.

After three strikes in three months, can Israel continue to keep quiet about air raids over Syria in the hope Damascus won’t respond?

By Raphael Ahren May 7, 2013, 1:16 am

An Israeli pilots sits at the cockpit of his F-15 Eagle fighter jet in an Israeli Air Force Base. (photo credit: Yossi Zeliger/Flash90)

On June 7, 1981, eight F-16s destroyed Saddam Hussein’s Osirak nuclear reactor in Baghdad. Less than a day later, the government of prime minister Menachem Begin acknowledged that the Israel Air Force was behind the attack, acting on the imperative to prevent an enemy state from obtaining nuclear weapons.

In 2013, three airstrikes were carried out in Syria — one on January 30 and two over the past weekend — that reportedly destroyed weapons convoys on their way to Israel’s enemies in Lebanon. All three attacks were blamed on Israel, but the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained radio silence. (In February, then-defense minister Ehud Barak hinted at Israeli involvement in the earlier strike but stopped short of directly acknowledging it.)

The silence seems to be consistent with Jerusalem’s view of the region as an unstable powder keg that can explode into war at a moment’s notice. By keeping mum, some say Netanyahu is betting that Damascus will take the benefit of the doubt and won’t feel compelled to respond.

“Israel was trying to maintain a responsible and thoughtful policy of maintaining its deterrence, while at the same time not trying to cause any escalation, war, difficulties and turmoil by putting any actor into a corner in which they would feel compelled to strike out,” said Dr. Benjamin Molov, who teaches international relations and conflict resolution at Bar-Ilan University.

This week, no official dared to so much as insinuate that Israel was behind the air raids. Netanyahu told reporters on Monday that he was “prevented” from commenting on the issue.

Speaking on Army Radio the same day, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni clammed up too. “It isn’t right, it isn’t proper, and it is harmful [to talk about the issue], period,” she said. “I am not going to make hints in either direction, so don’t ask any questions,” she added, scolding the interviewer for even bringing up the topic. “What I’d like to say is that all the noise, all the statements and comments, are merely adding tension to a region that is already explosive, and therefore I won’t take part in this.”

This policy of ambiguity worked in 2007 when Israel bombed a plutonium nuclear reactor deep inside Syria. No one in Jerusalem took credit for the attack. And Assad — not yet neck-deep in a civil war — did not respond with force, although he knew his reactor was not a casualty of spontaneous combustion.

How long will Israel get away with a military doctrine that has been called “shock and shush”? The official silence can only go so far until it becomes a charade and Assad knows that everyone knows. After three strikes in three months, all the “no comments” in the world won’t shelter Assad from questions about why he is not retaliating.

“The real question is, how much humble pie can Assad eat and still keep his svelte figure,” Nathan Thrall, an analyst for the International Crisis Group in Jerusalem, told The New York Times on Monday.

Netanyahu, too, has found himself under increasing pressure to fess up from some quarters.

“One can understand Israel’s assumed initial position that ambiguity could reduce the chance of a Syrian response,” Haaretz military correspondent Amos Harel wrote. “It’s harder to understand stubbornly sticking to that position after the secret is out… The bottom line — if the reports of Israeli involvement are correct — is that Israel is now more involved in the Syrian civil war than ever, and after three attacks attributed to the Israel Defense Forces in three months, Israel is at greater risk of getting pulled into the fighting.”

Most Israelis have not feared being dragged into the Syrian civil war, but with this becoming more likely with every additional airstrike, Harel argues, “wouldn’t it be prudent for the premier to explain to Israelis, if only in general terms, what’s going on in the north?”

Two of the men who took part in for Menachem Begin’s decision to acknowledge Israel was behind the 1981 strike at Osirak, however, said openness was the right choice at that time, and Netanyahu’s silence was the right option today.

“Back then, we decided we’d publicize [that we’d bombed Osirak] if any Arab media outlet published it, and that’s exactly what happened,” said Shlomo Nakdimon, who was Begin’s media adviser in 1981.

Only US president Ronald Reagan and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat knew about the attack in advance, and Jerusalem decided  not to make any statements if nobody in the Arab world first blamed Israel. However, mere hours after the attack, a Jordanian radio station hinted that Israel blew up the reactor. As soon as the cat was out of the bag, Begin himself made the decision to publish a statement that had been prepared in advance.

“There was after a discussion afterward” about whether it was the right thing to do, Nakdimon recalled. “But we’re not going to look like thieves in the night.”

Yet Syria in 2013 is not Iraq in 1981, added Nakdimon, a journalist and historian of the state of Israel. Netanyahu, he said, has good reasons for not owning up to the airstrikes now.

Begin’s former Cabinet secretary, Professor Aryeh Naor, fully agreed.

“So far it works,” Naor said of Netanyahu’s shock-and-shush tactics.

But will it continue working in the weeks and months to come, as more and more sophisticated weapons might be sent on their way to Israel’s enemies, and Israel may feel the need to intercept them?

“It’s impossible to know,” said Naor, who chairs the politics and communications department at Hadassah Academic College Jerusalem. “But in the mean time, it’s like the Americans say: if it’s not broken, don’t fix it.”