WarSclerotic

Western media outlets, including some Israeli ones, behaved over the weekend like dupes captivated by charmers. The media drew hope both from the words of Iranian President Hasan Rouhani and the list of chemical weapons sites submitted by Syrian President Bashar Assad to the U.N.

With our eyes we see Iran’s centrifuges multiplying and spinning faster, but Rouhani declared that his government has no interest in producing nuclear weapons, so the West was thrilled. A happy U.S. President Barack Obama confirmed that he opened a line of personal communication with Rouhani, and the West, which yearns for inaction, felt relieved.

Rouhani’s statement was certainly important. Of course, there is room to analyze how and why it was made. There is even some chance that it represents the dawn of a new spirit in Tehran. But the reality, based on past experience and the fact that the Iranian regime wields power via deceit, fraud and subterfuge, is that suspicion still outweighs trust. So why is the media so satisfied?

The same goes for Assad. The U.S.-Russia agreement forced Assad to hand over a list of his chemical weapons sites within a week. But what guarantee is there that he provided a complete list? Are these all the sites? Assad may now be trying to smuggle some of his chemical weapons outside of Syria’s borders. Guile and lies are legitimate tools in the cat-and-mouse games played in the Middle East. So for what reason did the media rush to celebrate?

Assad may have submitted a complete list, but it is more likely that he did not. Both Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro have talked about the possibility that Assad bought time and legitimacy for his regime. There is no real guarantee that the U.S.-Russia agreement will be implemented and Putin has not even committed to supporting sanctions on Assad if the deal fails. It is good that the list was submitted, but it is still too early to feel positive about it.

Also, Russia supported a proposal initiated by Arab countries to have the International Atomic Energy Agency force Israel to open the gates of the Dimona reactor for a check of its levels of nuclear activities. Putin went as far as to quote Mordechai Vanunu to justify his opposition to Israel’s alleged nuclear arsenal. Putin said Syria built chemical weapons in response to Israel’s nuclear weapons.

Israel was able to thwart the Arab proposal for now, but it has not disappeared. The Arabs, with support from Moscow, will bring it back every year. Israel must not even begin to discuss the matter with hostile states. But on the positive side, if the Iranian and Syrian presidents fulfill their commitments with actions and not just words, this was achieved because the American, European and Israeli threat to use force to defend humanity earned some credibility and deterred Tehran and Damascus. If one can get them to give up weapons of extermination without firing Tomahawk missiles, this will be because of a credible threat to use force against them.