Archive for the ‘General’ Category

Syria prepares — for what?

Tuesday, June 5th, 2007

What are they up to?

A member of the Syrian parliament, Muhammad Habash, confirmed on Tuesday that his country was actively preparing for war with Israel, expected to break out in the summer, Israel Radio reported.

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Habash said it was no secret that the Syrian military was arming itself for the upcoming confrontation with the IDF.

He also claimed that the Israeli government was the one that wanted the war so that it could survive politically. — Jerusalem Post

This last part is nonsense. This government would not be helped by war, and in fact is doing everything possible to avoid conflict, even in places where it should perhaps be more aggressive, such as Gaza.

The IDF is taking Syrian activity quite seriously:

OC Military Intelligence Chief Maj. -Gen. Amos Yadlin also referred to the northern border in his briefing to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset.

“Syria is making very real preparations, cleaning army posts, conducting large drills and strengthening defenses. They are reaching a state of readiness for war more than in the past, but this doesn’t mean they’ll be ready for war tomorrow. The Syrians have a very large quantity of long-range missiles. They do not need to move forces around to attack with these missiles.

Within the IDF, movement of Syrian forces towards the Golan Heights border is considered a preliminary sign for potential escalation and allows the army time to prepare – usually 48 hours. Over the past few months the Syrian army raised its level of alert, thus effectively eroding most of the preliminary signs. Together with the long-range missiles mentioned by Yadlin, the implications of the latest developments are that Syria can potentially catch Israel by surprise. — Jerusalem Post

A surprise attack by Syria, especially if it targeted population centers with medium-range missiles, would be very, very foolhardy. Even combined (as it probably would be) with assaults by Hezbollah and Palestinian groups, there is no imaginable way it could prevent a massive Israeli counterstrike. It’s hard to imagine that Syrian President Bashar Assad is not well aware of this.

As I’ve written before, one possibility is a limited attack by Hezbollah and Hamas. In this scenario, the Arabs would be able to inflict significant damage on Israel and possibly force concessions on various issues while remaining under the international umbrella. In that case, the Syrian preparations might be seen as defensive, intended to deter Israel from hitting Syria, which will of course be supplying Hezbollah during the conflict.

Another possibility suggested by my own contacts in the IDF is that Syria is preparing for her role in a counterstrike against Israel if the US takes military action against Iranian nuclear sites. Such a counterstrike would certainly involve Hezbollah directly, and possibly covert action by Syria.

Although the political climate in the US does not appear to make an attack on Iran likely, the decision to do so is in the hands of the President. Something like a nuclear test or a terrorist attack in the US which could be attributed to Iran might trigger it.

Technorati Tags: , ,

What if Israelis had kidnapped Alan Johnston?

Monday, June 4th, 2007

Alan Johnston, the British academic boycott of Israel, and the incredible hypocrisy of the British media, all tied together:

Throughout Mr Johnston’s captivity, the BBC has continually emphasised that he gave “a voice” to the Palestinian people, the implication being that he supported their cause, and should therefore be let out. One cannot imagine the equivalent being said if he had been held by Israelis.

Well, he is certainly giving a voice to the Palestinian people now. And the truth is that, although it is under horrible duress, what he says is not all that different from what the BBC says every day through the mouths of reporters who are not kidnapped and threatened, but are merely collecting their wages.

Read the whole article by Charles Moore here.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Peace Now has become an anti-Zionist organization

Monday, June 4th, 2007

Peace Now will be demonstrating against ‘the occupation’ in Hebron tomorrow, the 40th anniversary of the start of the Six Day war.

The High Court of Justice ruled Monday that the Peace Now organization could go ahead with a protest to set take place Tuesday next to the Jewish settlement in the West Bank city of Hebron…

The commander of Hebron Brigade, Colonel Yehuda Fuchs, told the court that the protest would lead to a breach of the peace by settlers, which could endanger the lives of demonstrators, local Palestinian residents, IDF soldiers and police. — Ha’aretz

Tensions in Hebron are presently very high and one can understand the reluctance of the army to take the responsibility of preventing an explosion.

Peace now has always represented the left wing of the Zionist camp; that is, while advocating withdrawal to the 1967 lines (and some kind of compromise on Jerusalem), they have not gone as far as explicitly endorsing a right of return to Israel for Palestinian refugees or a binational state.

What is the significance of a demonstration on June 5? It would be unfair to suggest that Peace Now wishes that the 1967 war had gone the other way, as does the extreme Left.

Rather, they want to say that Israel should have reached a negotiated agreement (with the Arab nations? the Palestinians?) that would have traded the territories for peace; and that instead of doing this Israel built settlements which prolonged The Occupation, in their opinion the root of the present conflict with the Palestinians. To fix it, they advocate immediate negotiations to evacuate the territories and the settlements.

Now, I don’t want to try to tackle the question of what should have happened during the last 40 years. One could bring up the ‘three no’s’ of the Khartoum conference in September of 1967, or the duplicity of Yasser Arafat during the Oslo period to argue that it wasn’t as simple as Peace Now wants to suggest. But let’s just talk about today.

Today the Palestinians are governed by Hamas, which is presently waging war against Israel in the south, and which has consistently rejected any Jewish presence in the Mideast. The ‘moderate’ Arab states have proposed a non-negotiable ‘peace’ plan that is just a document of surrender, while the not-so-moderate ones like Syria and Iran are preparing for war.

Evacuating the West Bank and/or the Golan Heights today would simply be suicide. This is a fact regardless of whether you like the settlers in Hebron or whether you think that Israel’s policies over the past 40 years have been ill-advised. Today, the only peace that could be achieved this way would be the peace of the grave.

So why is Peace now — undoubtedly in combination with foreign and Palestinian ‘activists’ — trying to provoke a violent confrontation, which at best will divert the resources of the army and police away from protecting the nation, and at worst cause injuries and even deaths while feeding the anti-Israel propaganda machine?

With all due respect, there is no pro-Israel goal that can be served by this demonstration — only Israel’s enemies will benefit. If this is what they want, then it should be clear to everyone that Peace Now is an anti-Zionist organization.

Update [5 Jun 1022 PDT]: The demonstration took place, with only a few hundred Peace Now demonstrators appearing, and a large presence of police and soldiers. There was no right-wing counter-demonstration and no violence.

Palestinians threw stones at the bus carrying the Peace Now members, thus demonstrating that for them, as for Hitler, a Jew is a Jew. 

Technorati Tags: ,

Nothing will be more important than leadership

Sunday, June 3rd, 2007

More threats from the Iranian Hitler:

TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iran’s president said on Sunday the Lebanese and the Palestinians had pressed a “countdown button” to bring an end to Israel…

“With God’s help, the countdown button for the destruction of the Zionist regime has been pushed by the hands of the children of Lebanon and Palestine,” Ahmadinejad said in a speech.

“By God’s will, we will witness the destruction of this regime in the near future,” he said. He did not elaborate.

It’s interesting to speculate about what he gets from this bellicose language. I presume it’s done to help promote Iran as leader of the Muslim world, which is almost synonymous with ‘biggest enemy of Israel’.

This time the threat is not of an Iranian attack, but of a proxy war involving clients Hezbollah and Hamas.

Comparing the situation to that of the 1960’s and 70’s, we have Iran playing the role of the Soviet Union as the sponsor of Arab confrontation.

On the one hand, Israel’s position does not appear any worse than it was. The US appears to be supporting Israel at least as much, and possibly more, than in the past. Although it is bogged down in Iraq, it was no less bogged down in Vietnam then. Iran is no Soviet Union militarily. And Hamas and Hezbollah cannot theselves constitute an existential threat to Israel.

The greatest danger comes from a war with Hamas and Hezbollah escalating to include missile attacks from Syria and Iran. Such attacks could cause large numbers of casualties, even without nuclear involvement. But Israel’s powerful second-strike capability should deter this kind of escalation.

So what I expect, and what Ahmadinijad seems to be threatening, is a two-front war with Hamas and Hezbollah, waged by means of short-range rockets and infiltration of terrorists. Sort of a 2006 war on steroids, with the Arabs going for limited goals and, despite the threats, not the destruction of Israel.

On the one hand, Hamas is much more prepared than last summer, and Hezbollah is no less so. The presence of international forces in Lebanon may or may not deter Hezbollah, but will certainly constrain Israel’s response.

The IDF has learned some lessons, but it’s not clear if it has any more of an answer to short-range missiles than before. Another unknown is Israeli strategy: how close to Syria and Iran will Israel take the fight?

Nothing will be more important to Israel in this coming struggle than leadership.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Battered leftist syndrome

Sunday, June 3rd, 2007

Recently some commentators have started to use the phrase “battered nation syndrome” to explain the strange responses of some Israelis and Jews to Arab terrorism. The analogy is to an abusive relationship from which a woman (usually) won’t take steps to escape, because the continued violence has led to a loss in self-esteem and a conviction that the violence is somehow her fault.

Battered women often try to placate or conciliate their abusers, even when this behavior appears irrational to outsiders. And they often find that the abuser’s violent tendencies are actually reinforced by the victim’s passivity.

Yariv Oppenheimer of Peace Now writes

There is no way to avoid admitting the truth and to state clearly that the continued occupation, which this week will mark its 40th year, has inflicted a mortal wound on Israel’s status in the world. The British boycott is just the first harbinger of things to come.

A year ago, former US president Jimmy Carter published his book Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, which exposed a sad but accurate picture of the reality in the territories under Israeli control…

There is no way to avoid admitting the truth and to understand that the continued Israeli-Palestinian conflict presents Israel as an occupying nation, violent and forceful, which strives to conquer more territory and to expel Palestinian citizens from their land.

Oppenheimer is probably aware of the almost 100-year history of violent Arab rejection of a Jewish presence in the Middle East. Somehow he fails to make the connection between the fact and nature of the occupation and this rejection.

Even further, he fails to see that the occupation can’t possibly be a sufficient explanation for the extreme Israel-hatred that underlies the boycott, nor does he appear to notice that Carter is paid by Saudi Arabia for his work. How does he miss these things?

A reasonable person would conclude that Israel is being ‘presented’ as at fault here because the boycotters and Carter are trying to divert the blame for the conflict from violent Arab rejectionism and place it on Israel. But Oppenheimer doesn’t get it because he is a battered leftist.

He believes that the rejectionists can be placated by withdrawals from occupied territory, despite the fact that the violence started long before there even was a state of Israel, not to mention occupied territory. And he is unable to see that the conciliatory behavior that he favors, such as the withdrawals from South Lebanon and Gaza, have been perceived as weakness and have reinforced the violent tendencies of Israel’s abusers.

We need to see the abusers and their allies as they are, and not as distorted by the psychological defense mechanisms of those like Oppenheimer.

Technorati Tags: , ,