Military Review

What Syria does Israel need?

27
What Syria does Israel need?Only 20 percent of Americans agree with the statement that the US refusal of military operations in Syria can strengthen the position of other rogue states. These are the results of a survey conducted yesterday by the Associated Press. The survey showed, however, that most Americans oppose even a limited operation in Syria. The position of the majority of American citizens is in conflict with the assertions of the Washington administration that ignoring what is happening in Syria strikes the US national interests. 53 percent of respondents also fear that a strike on Syria could lead to a protracted military conflict and the entry of American troops into Syrian territory. According to analysts, the survey reflects the tiredness of American society from a series of military conflicts in the Middle East.


The White House administration said yesterday that it was “skeptical” of the Russian initiative to transfer Syrian chemical weapons under the control of the international community. “Potentially, the Russian initiative could be a breakthrough,” Barack Obama said in an interview with NBC yesterday. “But, given the situation that has developed in Syria over the past couple of years, we have to remain skeptics.” Although the United States, according to Secretary of State John Kerry, will consider the proposal of Russia, the White House is not going to abandon its plans to get support for the military operation in Congress. Kerry added that his comments on the conditions for refusing to strike on Syria, which he gave the day before, were “rhetorical” and should not be perceived by the Russian side as a proposal. According to White House press secretary Jay Carney, the presidential administration did not like the hasty the reaction of Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, who approved the initiative of Russia.

Meanwhile, Israeli experts recall that, although the Assad regime is associated with Iran and Hezbollah, the Syrian rebels are mostly not supporters of democracy, but are groups directly supported by Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. Israel’s policy towards Syria today is to refrain from being drawn into the conflict (provided that there is no immediate threat to the security of the Jewish state).

An important question that is occupied by analysts is whether there are any forces among the Syrian opposition that are inclined towards dialogue with the West and are not radical Islamic fundamentalists.
“It is impossible to accurately determine the balance of power between jihadists and supporters of secular power among the Syrian opposition,”
- Professor Itamar Rabinovich, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, said in an interview with The Jerusalem Post. Rabinovich argues that the secular opposition in Syria should not be written off and far from the fact that after the fall of the Assad regime, radical Islamists will come to power. “If the West participates in the conflict, it will be able to strengthen the positions of secularists,” he believes.

“What is better for Israel,” Rabinovich asks a rhetorical question, “to deal with the axis of Assad — Hezbollah — Iran or with a victorious opposition, among which Islamists can dominate?” Syria is not Sinai, where Islamists act, but Israel does not interfere there, because it respects Egyptian sovereignty. In Syria, Israel may well act against the Islamists. ”


GLORIA Center Director Barry Rubin believes that the civil war in Syria is at an impasse, neither side has a clear advantage and this situation, provided that there is no external intervention, can last for years. Israel, Rubin believes, should be in a Syrian conflict worry about the following: the US willingness to fulfill its obligations; Iran’s policy on its atomic program (which will also depend on US actions in Syria); what forces will come to power after the overthrow of Assad; the fate of the syrian chemical weaponswhich can get to Hezbollah. What remains important is the question of what policy Iran will pursue with respect to Syria, Rubin said. Will Iran seek the victory of Assad or will it satisfy the division of the country between the opposing factions - provided that it maintains access to the Mediterranean Sea in its zone of influence? Rubin does not exclude the possibility that the parties to the conflict may come to a decision on the division of the country by mutual agreement.
“In any case,” he emphasizes, “the American military action will not lead to an end to the civil war.”


"The Islamist opposition in Syria can be divided into three main groups," stresses Jonathan Speyer, a researcher at the same GLORIA Center. - Close to al-Qaeda; not directly linked to al Qaeda, but opposed to democracy and liberal values; Salafis occupying a somewhat autonomous position. ”


“The most powerful opposition grouping is the Syrian Islamic Liberation Front. I, as a specialist in Syria, can argue that this grouping cannot be called a democracy. In its ideology, it is closest to the "Muslim Brotherhood", "
- notes Spayer. The researcher noted that among the opposition forces there are supporters of secular views, but they obviously do not play a leading role there. The goal of the United States in the upcoming operation should not be the fall of Assad, but the weakening of Iran’s position, the expert believes. British analyst Charles Lister recalls that those representatives of the opposition, who in the West are considered moderate or even supporters of democracy, are such only by Syrian standards, but by no means by Western ones. Some of them say, for example: we are not against free elections, but Sunnis should hold all positions of responsibility, Christians should not be allowed to rule at all. “The opposition is a conglomeration of temporary tactical allies, many of whom are irreconcilable ideological rivals. If the opposition wins, the conflict between its various factions will almost certainly not be avoided, ”Lister notes.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.jewish.ru/theme/world/2013/09/news994320892.php
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Brummbar
    Brummbar 16 September 2013 06: 08 New
    +3
    Israel needs a desert instead of Syria.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 16 September 2013 06: 24 New
      +2
      Quote: Brummbar
      Israel needs a desert instead of Syria.

      Israel has been able to do this for a long time. However, they don’t do it, although, say, in 1973 they had a legal right, and at other times they would have found a reason, there would have been a desire. Obviously there was no desire. So your opinion, to put it mildly, does not correspond.
      1. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 16 September 2013 10: 08 New
        0
        Do not exaggerate the power of Israel, especially in 1973, after the desert the whole world would turn away from them and then the other Arabs would also have no brakes, the same sarin would fly from all sides and Turkey could not stay away preserving its face, so that they didn’t have such an opportunity.
        1. Revolver
          Revolver 17 September 2013 01: 48 New
          0
          Quote: tilovaykrisa
          so they didn’t have such an opportunity.
          They had more than one such opportunity, and not only in stock, but even suspended from the aircraft. So, if the Arabs broke through the front, one conditional signal would be enough. But the Jews kept the front, after which they piled on the Arabs in full, even without these "opportunities", which were safely removed back to the vaults.
          Quote: tilovaykrisa
          and then other Arabs would have no brakes either
          Just the kind of desert in, say, Syria, or Cairo, washed away by the tsunami after the explosion of the Aswan Dam, would have sobered the most reckless Arabs. No one would have imagined how many more bombs the Jews had left in the storehouse, but even a hedgehog would have understood that the next would go to the one who would rock the boat.
      2. AlNikolaich
        AlNikolaich 16 September 2013 11: 30 New
        +1
        Quote: Nagan
        say, in 1973 they had a legal right, and in other times they would have found a reason, there would have been a desire.

        Do not go too far, especially if you are talking about legal law ...
  2. Sirs
    Sirs 16 September 2013 06: 16 New
    +1
    Something cracked in the ball house. Israel is worried that a great friendship with the United States will cool.
    Other friends of the United States, the Saudis and the Qatari simply do not see another way to destroy Syria, as a great friendship with the United States ends, as they say strike iron while it’s hot.
    1. bomg.77
      bomg.77 16 September 2013 06: 24 New
      +3
      Quote: Sirs
      Something cracked in the ball house. Israel is worried that a great friendship with the United States will cool.

      The White House is little Israel! Israel’s office, so to speak.
    2. demeen1
      demeen1 16 September 2013 09: 55 New
      0
      There is nothing to worry about, if the opposition wails under the flags of al-Qaeda, the next one will be Israel.
  3. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 16 September 2013 06: 17 New
    +3
    The famous enemy is better than the unknown. A weakened famous enemy is even better.
  4. Revolver
    Revolver 16 September 2013 06: 18 New
    +2
    Well, it seems that even Lieberman believes that the deal on the chemical disarmament of Syria is good for Israel. And Lieberman there is considered to be a hawk.
    Quote http://mignews.com/news/politic/world/150913_114023_16464.html
    The head of the Our Home Israel party, Avigdor Lieberman, expressed cautious optimism over the agreement between the Russians and the Americans on the elimination of Syria’s chemical arsenal.
    Lieberman said in an interview with the Israel Defense Forces Radio: "An agreement on Syria is good for Israel. The real test is how it will be implemented in practice."
    1. andrejwz
      andrejwz 16 September 2013 08: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: Nagan
      Well, it seems that even Lieberman believes that the deal on the chemical disarmament of Syria is good for Israel.

      Good. So far, no one has raised the issue of the chemical disarmament of Israel.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 16 September 2013 09: 00 New
        +3
        Quote: andrejwz
        Good. So far, no one has raised the issue of the chemical disarmament of Israel.

        On horseradish ass harmony? And to hell with chemistry Israel, if it seems to have nuclear warheads for missiles?
        1. tilovaykrisa
          tilovaykrisa 16 September 2013 10: 10 New
          0
          They have Khimki in decent amounts, remember the thrift of the Israelis, nuclear weapons are much more expensive than chemistry, so first they will use Chemistry if that.
  5. My address
    My address 16 September 2013 06: 24 New
    +1
    Wasn’t it easier for Israel to come to an agreement a year ago, with our mediation, with Syria about neutrality? Or Bene Neta ... (how was he?) Wanted to play in a street thunderstorm?

    And Babama is all good! As the child folded his sponge, turned away — offended means. Pumpkin think more often! Other people's clever ideas do not take offense at all (or at all?) Not clever.
    1. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 16 September 2013 10: 05 New
      +3
      Wasn’t it easier for Israel to come to an agreement a year ago, with our mediation, with Syria about neutrality? Or Bene Neta ... (how was he?) Wanted to play in a street thunderstorm?


      Here from here in more detail, please - with whom exactly in Syria and on what conditions could Israel negotiate "neutrality" a year ago?
      1. My address
        My address 16 September 2013 15: 37 New
        0
        Yes, for God's sake, Eugene!
        Then the GDP could put pressure on Assad, and the latter would go forward. Officially, a little stutter about the Golan Heights, and on the sidelines of the UN to sign a mutually binding document. There may have been, there were other options. And now Israel can be a great loser anyway. Even neutral for him in Syria will not.
        And for the question plus.
        1. Tourist Breakfast
          Tourist Breakfast 16 September 2013 22: 17 New
          +2
          Yes, for God's sake, Eugene!
          Then the GDP could put pressure on Assad, and the latter would go forward. Officially, a little stutter about the Golan Heights, and on the sidelines of the UN to sign a mutually binding document. There may have been, there were other options. And now Israel can be a great loser anyway. Even neutral for him in Syria will not.
          And for the question plus.


          Thank you for your reply!

          There are two problems here:

          First, Assad is controlled by Iran to a much greater extent than GDP. And Iran, in turn, is not interested in peace between Israel and Syria.

          The second - a year ago (as now) Assad did not control the entire territory of the country, and therefore was not able to guarantee compliance with the terms of any agreements.

          And most importantly - why does Assad need this? In my opinion at the moment he is completely not up to negotiations with Israel, because he has more important things to do.
          1. My address
            My address 17 September 2013 23: 27 New
            0
            Eugene!

            Even a year ago, Syria was significantly dependent on Russia. And it would have been nice for Israel to have a country like Egypt in its neighbors (at one time there was such a formation as the United Arab Republic from Egypt and Syria, so how is Syria better / worse?), Rather neutral.

            And that Assad did not control the entire country, so it is an incentive to interest him in neutrality. Right now, the train is really gone. And for all.

            You know, I normally belong to different nationalities. In my childhood, in a hooligan district, there was a Jewish childhood friend. And I worked with beautiful Jews, Tatars, and others. And I knew derrrymovy Russian, as well as others. And I know that a thin world with its neighbors is better than any quarrel. And I wish Israel and Syria neighbors without hatred and without a mess. And in Syria, the case goes to the last one, which comes around at all. As for the Palestinians, this is another matter; you yourself spoiled them in many ways.

            And you are a plus again.
        2. atalef
          atalef 16 September 2013 22: 32 New
          +1
          Quote: My address
          There were, WERE, other options. And now, Israel could be great to lose anyway. Even neutral for him in Syria will not.
          And for the question plus.

          As for the options in more detail, and to wage the war is ridiculous. Syria in the prime of its power, with the support of the USSR and the entire Arab world, attacked 5 times and received nothing but a bouquet in the face. Now that miserable semblance of an army that can’t do anything in a civil war for 2 years is the enemy. The only balance of Syria was the world's largest chemical weapons stockpiles, but thanks to the GDP and this last counterweight was removed.
  6. svp67
    svp67 16 September 2013 07: 16 New
    +1
    Which, which - but not some, "the best Syria for Israel is dead Syria ..."
    1. atalef
      atalef 16 September 2013 22: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      Which, which - but not some, "the best Syria for Israel is dead Syria ..."

      The best Syria is a neighbor, like Jordan and Egypt. They made peace, got territories, live quietly and no one attacks them. Syria was offered several times to conclude a peace treaty with the return of territories. They do not agree, they only want a war. Well, if 10 years ago (negotiations between Barak and Faruk a Shary (the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Syria (formerly because he had escaped)), they didn’t want to. The Golan was still possible to get back, now there’s no one to negotiate with. that figure and how long it will last no one can guarantee
  7. mirag2
    mirag2 16 September 2013 07: 18 New
    +1
    Hello, I won’t enter into polemics, but I know for sure what kind of Syria Israel needs, such as what Iraq is now-torn by internecine war, weak. And even better, several weak states with no economy, with external control from America, tame rulers, such as Noriega in Nicaragua. This is the kind of Syria Israel needs, and no other. Any other will be worse.
    And all the conversations, like- "it’s not profitable for us to fight next to us .. etc ..." is nonsense, because they can easily separate their borders from any terrorists, they will build a wall, or just close the border and they will shoot everyone who comes closer than possible. Most importantly, with the fall, and the actual destruction of Syria as a state, one of the pillars of their main enemies in the Middle East, Hezbollah, will fall. Only Iran will remain (cells in Lebanon almost do not count then America, the Israeli-led lobby will crush him too.
    ps it is worth listening to David Duke (from 89 to 92, the representative of the state of Louisiana, has repeatedly been nominated for the presidency of the United States, claims that "all people have the basic human right to preserve their heritage") - he understands US politics from the inside.
    ps, ps So what I said is purely my opinion.
    ps, ps, ps And the new Qatari prince, like the Saudis, didn’t establish any relations with Israel. As a result, it will slide into the economic field. And the IDEAL enemy they have now is Hezbollah.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 16 September 2013 08: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: mirag2
      Ps worth listening to David Duke (from 89 to 92gg representative of the state of Louisiana, repeatedly nominated for president of the United States, claims that "all people have the basic human right to preserve their heritage")

      This David Duke has a Nazi reputation in the United States, and he was elected to Congress from the county with a predominance of rednecks. It got to the point that in the next election the top party of the Republican Party, including then-President Bush Papa, supported openly, including money, his rival Democrat, who successfully defeated this Natsik. Since then, David Duke - a political corpse, and was not elected anywhere, at least once tried. I even heard somewhere in my ear that he was kicked out of the KKK for extremism.
      So is this Duke an authority for you? Oh well.
      1. mirag2
        mirag2 17 September 2013 04: 27 New
        0
        What are you, what are you! No, he is not an authority for me! And he never was! I just want to say that he pays very good attention to the presence of the Jewish lobby in the American political system, and how it affects the state’s foreign policy .
  8. Lindon
    Lindon 16 September 2013 09: 52 New
    0
    It is not clear from the article what kind of Syria would suit Israel.
    For this minus. The article needs a different headline.
  9. regdan
    regdan 16 September 2013 11: 10 New
    0
    "What kind of Syria does Israel need?" This is the wrong question. They are afraid to ask the right question, but I will ask it! "Does an illegally educated Israel need the world?"
  10. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 16 September 2013 14: 47 New
    0
    It is clear that Israel is losing all the options for the development of events around Syria. Recall attempts to establish "democracy" in Libya. After the defeat of Gaddafi's supporters, an internecine struggle unfolded in various Islamic groups in the country. Nobody even remembered democracy. Then the American ambassador was killed. In Syria, the scenario will be similar. After all, the characters are the same: Al Qaeda, Islamic fundamentalist radicals, etc. Eventually, Israel may gain an even more radical neighbor. Does he need this? Probably not
  11. igor67
    igor67 16 September 2013 22: 22 New
    +1
    On Monday evening, it became known that today, at 14:25 local time, the Turkish Air Force shot down the Syrian M-17 helicopter, which, according to the Turkish authorities, violated their country's airspace and penetrated 2 km away.

    The leading Turkish newspaper Hurriyet writes about this today, September 16, with reference to Vice Prime Minister Bulent Arynch.

    The report notes that several warnings were made to the intruder, to which the helicopter crew did not respond, after which a military aircraft flying from the base of Malatia launched a missile at it.

    Arynch emphasized that these actions are prescribed by an agreement with Syria, concluded after Syria shot down a Turkish plane in June 2012.

    The details of this agreement were not made public, but a number of sources claim that, according to this document, the Turkish army has the right to open fire on the Syrian military, who violated the country's borders and penetrated more than 5 km.

    Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said that he would inform the UN Security Council and NATO leadership about this incident.
    1. mirag2
      mirag2 17 September 2013 04: 31 New
      0
      Yes, moreover, the Syrians replied that he crossed the border because of a pilot error. The human factor. And what does "what kind of Syria Israel needs"?