A senior Syrian official on Monday warned that if attacked, his country would retaliate against Israel. Khalaf Muftah, a senior Baath Party official who used to serve as Syria’s assistant information minister, said in a radio interview that Damascus would consider Israel “behind the [Western] aggression and [it] will therefore come under fire.”
“We have strategic weapons and we’re capable of responding,” he said. “Normally the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”
Muftah concluded with a warning that “If the US or Israel make the mistake of taking advantage of the chemical issue… the region will go up in flames… that will affect security not only in the region but across the world.”
His words were echoed by Iranian officials, who on Monday shrugged off the threat of a US attack on its close ally Syria, but said that if such a strike were to take place, Israel would suffer.
“[The Americans] are incapable of starting a new war in the region, because of their lacking economic capabilities and their lack of morale,” said Mohammad Reza Naqdi, the commander of the Republican Guards’ elite Basij force.
“No military attack will be waged against Syria,” said Hossein Sheikholeslam, a member of Iran’s Islamic Consultative Assembly. “Yet, if such an incident takes place, which is impossible, the Zionist regime will be the first victim of a military attack on Syria.”
The statements came as Britain reportedly pushed for US action on Syria in the wake of a horrific alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians outside Damascus. According to a report from the Times of London, British Prime Minister David Cameron wants a strike in the coming days while outrage over the alleged attack is still fresh. British Foreign Minister William Hague said in an interview with the BBC on Monday that action could be taken even without the full support of the UN Security Council.
Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Western nations calling for military action against Syria have no proof the Syrian government is behind the alleged chemical weapons attack.
France, Britain, Israel and some US congressmen have said military action against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime should be an option if it has used such weapons. A UN team is on the ground investigating the August 21 attack that left hundreds dead.
Lavrov said in a news conference that the countries calling for action have assumed the role of “both investigators and the UN Security Council” in probing the incident.
“They cannot produce evidence, but keep on saying that the ‘red line’ has been crossed and they cannot wait any longer,” he said.
Lavrov likened the situation in Syria to the run-up before the 2003 military operation in Iraq. He warned against military intervention in Syria, saying “the use of force without a sanction of the UN Security Council is a crude violation of the international law.”
Russia’s foreign policy chief also blamed the Syrian opposition for manipulating reports of the attack in order to derail a peace conference on Syria. Lavrov said Russian and US experts were days away from meeting up to arrange a peace conference in Geneva on Syria.
“This hysteria will definitely work against this meeting,” he said.
In Syria, a UN vehicle belonging to a team investigating the alleged use of chemical weapons in Damascus was shot at by snipers Monday as experts were moving to investigate the incident, which left hundreds dead.
“I don’t have any doubts that it will be said that the firing came from the other side. But all this is moving in one direction and doesn’t inspire optimism,” Lavrov said.


August 26, 2013 at 5:01 PM
Resolve melter….
August 26, 2013 at 5:32 PM
The 4 sides of politics in action.
!) the openly politics
2) The hidden inter state politics
3) the back door politics
4) the internal state politics between governments and military apparatus.
O lord the sea is so big and my boat is so small..
August 26, 2013 at 5:46 PM
Big test, should the West back down now their impotence will be out in the open for all to see.
Obamas red lines forces him to capitulate or start down the military road to who knows where.
Bad options both. O’ Israel, the consequences of your hesitancy is now becoming crystal clear.
Where’s Winston when you need him.
August 26, 2013 at 6:45 PM
Half way the military road is even worse, it is all or nothing
August 26, 2013 at 6:57 PM
High stakes poker we have here. Nothing, leaves Israel in a neiborhood that has learned its ok to use CW. All, could lead to WWIII. Half way will cover asses and pay the butcher Doctor a lesson. Makes it tougher to repeat his actions. Might be the only way out.
August 26, 2013 at 7:01 PM
Swarm flock of Tomahawks on top of his head. that should get his attention.
August 26, 2013 at 11:24 PM
I do not see Russia go to WWII over syria,
August 27, 2013 at 12:28 AM
Hope is by nature an expensive commodity, and those who are risking their all on one cast find out what it means only when they are already ruined
Thucydides
August 26, 2013 at 6:04 PM
Israel should also issue an explicit warning to Iran if Syria should attack Israel : ” Israel would consider Iran behind the Syrian aggression against Israel and as such, Iran will come under fire.”
Such a warning should be issued immediately and in a clean form, for nobody should be confused after certain events will take place.
August 26, 2013 at 8:24 PM
I agree about the warning. It should be carefully composed in a way that leaves no doubt as to our intentions. I dissagree though, as to timing….mmmm….you know what I mean.
August 26, 2013 at 8:40 PM
Should Israel been attacked this time and no matter by who and how, we have to clarify to our ”friends” in this region that: ” Baal HaBait Hishtagheea”( Hebrew, meaning the ”lord of the land got nuts and can do whatever he want to do”) so, my dear Uranians – oops, I meant Iranians – look out, the kids in this neighborhood got crazy, so see yourselves been warned.
August 26, 2013 at 6:10 PM
Agreed, Netanyahu needs to find his inner Churchill!
August 26, 2013 at 7:41 PM
Russia has Obama sized up and they do not see much. Russia will go eye to eye with Obama and expect him to blink. I hope Obama has read Barbara Tuchman’s “The Guns of August” about the month leading up to WWI in which events just took a life of their own and got out of control. This can easily happen right now. If Assad retaliates with an attack on Israel he and Hezbollah will throw everything at once, including gas. Syria is like a team with no substitutes, meaning that it does not have the ability to fight a long war against Israel, so expect it to light up all the fireworks at once hoping that it does great damage the Israeli war machine.
August 26, 2013 at 7:53 PM
Not to mention Hellbollah and Iran!
August 26, 2013 at 8:08 PM
John Kerry speaks…
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2553565088001/
August 26, 2013 at 8:11 PM
Now he’s 30 minutes late…will start at 2:30pm EST.
August 26, 2013 at 8:12 PM
It’s a live stream, so link into it now. It’s going to be about Syria.
August 26, 2013 at 8:46 PM
Still not yet and it’s 2:45pm ….fashionably late I guess.
August 26, 2013 at 9:02 PM
Well there your have it folks. Kerry expressed outrage in a forceful tone but fell short on action. No decision has been made yet.
August 26, 2013 at 8:53 PM
They boxed themselves into a diplomatic corner and this worries me
August 26, 2013 at 9:04 PM
Kerry’s comments were brief. He was in a hurry to check to polls to see if the American people were outraged enough to call for military action.
August 26, 2013 at 9:03 PM
The decision is to talk it to death. They blinked.
August 26, 2013 at 9:05 PM
Nothing’s changed.
August 26, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Syria and Iran warn Israel?
Israel’s answer should be: Go ahead, make my day!
That would give an Israeli strike even more justification for an attack on Iran.
The perfect opportunity to kill 2 flies at one time.
If the US/NATO strike, there are these possible scenarios.
1. A largely ‘symbolic’ attack causing not much damage and meant as a punishment and a deterrence from further gas attacks.
2. An attack that tips the balance in favor of the rebels without taking care of the chemical weapons.
(dangerous for Israel and the wider region, if the chemicals fall into the hands of islamic radicals).
3. An attack that takes out the chemical weapons but leaves the balance unchanged.
4. An attack that takes out the chemical weapons and changes the balance in favor of the rebels.
5. An attack that takes out the chemical weapons,changes the balance in favor of the rebels and takes also all of Assads’s advanced weapons out.
It goes without saying that in any scenario ground troops should be avoided as much as possible and if they are used they should get the hell out as soon as the mission is accomolished. No nation building BS a la Iraq/Afghanistan and no winning of hearts and minds. Just destruction of the assets.
Although #5 is the best scenario I believe that if the West chooses to act, it will go for #1, #2 or for #4.
As for the Idea that Syria will turn into a peaceful or democratic state anytime soon, forget it.
This is just an illusion that cannot become reality. No one, not even the US/NATO can achieve this.
Syria is another post colonial artificial state that could be only held together by a brutal dictator.
At best it can be a state like Iraq with the constant terrorism and violence of the opposing ethnic and religious groups or it will split into several independent states but that also will mean a long drawn out war about who gets what territory.
Concerning the WW3-stuff. I don’t believe it. Putin will not start a full scale war. As undemocratic as Putin is he still depends on the Russian people which is not ready for such a war and neither care the Russian people much about Syria.
August 26, 2013 at 9:34 PM
6. UN resolution, stern letter to Syria, more UN ‘peacekeepers’ on ground, more sanctions, Russia and China threaten to veto any military action, John Kerry gets nomiated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Did I miss anything?
August 26, 2013 at 9:41 PM
Yes, one tiny but important word: IF
August 26, 2013 at 11:16 PM
Hmmm…I was thinking IDF. 😉