Let Hezbollah and Islamic State destroy one another /
Guy BechorOp-ed: In light of the fast changing situation on the borders, Israel should have a channel of dialogue with Hezbollah in order to convey calming messages – including quiet non-aggression agreements.
Analysis: Former Mossad chief says military conflict between Israel and Iran on Syrian soil will start off with favorable conditions for Israel. But Israel will also have to take Russia’s stance into account and will require serious security and diplomatic American backing.
There is a striking resemblance between the way Israel’s leaders and its enemies’ leaders on the northern front express themselves, both in terms of the nature of the conflict and in some of the techniques used by the sides as they go along.
Both Israel and Hezbollah engaged last month in attempts to shape the “rules of the game” along the line separating between Israel and Syria in the Golan Heights, as well in narrative changes which both sides needed.
Several days before the incident which left Jihad Mughniyeh and an Iranian general dead, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah stated that his organization was no present in the Golan Heights. When six Hezbollah members were killed in the incident, the organization failed to deny that its people were active there. What Hezbollah was trying to conceal had been exposed. Hezbollah and the Iranians responded to the operation separately, each promising revenge.
Israel’s conduct was more complicated in the first stages. Israel did not claim responsibility for the assassination, although the conditions of its execution in broad daylight made it difficult to conceal the operators’ identity. It seemed that Israel had originally aspired to “contain” the incident by denying its involvement, apparently hoping to prevent an additional deterioration that way.
But this is where two goals became more complicated: The first goal was to “contain” the incident vis-à-vis Hezbollah and the Iranians, and the second goal was to encourage the Israeli public. At first, a senior Israeli official was quoted as saying that Israel was unaware of the Iranian’s presence at the site, but several days later the defense minister ruled that the general’s assassination was essential.
And then came the Mount Dov incident which left two Givati fighters dead. This incident prompted Nasrallah to deliver an elaborate speech in which he created an analogy between the Golan Heights and Mount Dov incidents: They both occurred in broad daylight, they both achieved goals, and therefore the two fronts – the Golan Heights and southern Lebanon – are one.
He also declared that he was not eager to go to war at this time, but that if a war would be forced on Hezbollah, he was prepared for it and believed he would win. Nasrallah basically sought to declare that Israel and Lebanon are currently in a state of mutual deterrence.
At this stage, Israel allegedly adopted a different tactic. It declared that would not accept Nasrallah’s formula that southern Lebanon and the Golan Heights share the same fate, and that it would therefore continue its work to prevent Hezbollah and the Iranians from taking hold of the Golan.
This was joined, however, by two additional moves, which are likely the significant moves as far as Jerusalem is concerned: The government spokespeople made sure to stress last week that the leaders of Syria and Lebanon were responsible for everything taking place on the other side, while the prime minister and defense minister ruled over the weekend that the main generator of the latest round was Iran, as part of the escalating comprehensive conflict between Jerusalem and Tehran. The rest were not even mentioned.
The Iranian government’s senior ranks, which are analyzing the events of the recent weeks and the clear statements in Israel, may be concluding that Israel has decided to challenge Iran. The definition given to the assassination of the Iranian general cannot be interpreted in any other way. Indeed, the Iranians are saying that they have an open account with Israel and plan to settle the score.
I am not certain that there was a “look before you leap” consideration in Jerusalem, but this is the outcome right now. A military conflict between Israel and Iran on Syrian soil, if it indeed happens, will start off with favorable conditions for Israel. Iran is inferior to Israel in many strategic aspects, and a crushing defeat in Syria may critically affect its regional and international status.
But Israel will also have to take Russia’s stance regarding such a war into account, as Russia is involved in the Syrian crisis through a massive supply of weapons and extensive presence on the ground. Serious security and diplomatic American backing will be more crucial than ever for the Israeli government.
These considerations may cause Israel to favor the “containment” of the recent conflict, which Nasrallah is interested in too. But “containment” is always a temporary cure.
Efraim Halevy is a former Mossad chief.
@ Bear Klein:
BK;
Russia is managed by rational and nationalistic autocrats. The USA, Canada, and Western Europe are all under control of liberal democracies which largely have accustomed themselves to ignore their own national interests. I trust rational and nationalist autocrats. I do not trust liberal democracies. Furthermore, I am interested in Israel developing into a rational and nationalist Jewish state.
I think that part of the long-term plan of Russia is to extend its control south of the Caucasus and to take over Iran, for purposes of basing a Russian Indian Ocean fleet on the south coast of that country. In fact, if and when the power of the USA degrades and shrinks back to North America, I think that will be one of the major moves Russia will make, and there will nobody in position to stop them. If and when that happens, Israel should in fact act like and actually be an ally of the Russian Federation. Or China. Or India. Or perhaps all three of them.
It is true that Russia has strong relationships with Iran and with the Iran-influenced Assad regime in Syria. Nevertheless, Russia has reverted to its permanent status as an Orthodox Christian empire that gained much of its heartland through many hundreds of years of all but continuous war against the Moslems. That is a fact that is never far from their minds.
As for China and India, the Islamic world is an enemy to both of them, and because neither of those huge societies adopted any of the western monotheistic religions, they have no inbred anti-Semitism about them whatsoever. That tells me much about Israel’s opportunities in working with those societies, whose combined populations equal about 40 percent of the total population of the world.
Allies are where you find them, and Israel should never put itself in position of dependency on anybody, and especially failing empires, irrespective of whether they are democracies or autocracies.
In any case, Israel’s trade with the Eurasian states, including the powers there, is picking up rapidly, so that Western European embargoes will have little effect on Israel’s economy.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
The USA is not a perfect ally at all and should be relied on a lot less. In other words Israel should be as independent as possible including weaning itself from the 4 billion dollars or so of assistance per year. Israel is expanding who it does business with and should continue on this path. It is even selling Russia stuff the EU is keeping from exporting to them (of a non-military nature).
This said, you may believe one can trust Russia and they could be a dependable ally but I for one think they have been on the side of those trying to destroy us for way too long.
Putin is selling the weapons that may prevent Israel from bombing the Iranian nuclear sites if it ever determines this is the best course of action. This is not something that one can gloss over with theories of the world order changing whether it does or not.
Russia is on the side of the Iranians and Syrians. Those people are dedicated to destroying Israel. How you can gloss over that I do not understand because I know you care about Israel.
@ Bear Klein:
BK;
Nobody is part of the solution of the Middle East. What’s more there almost certainly is no solution. I am sure you must have heard somewhere that problems may have solutions, but conditions are something one learns to live with.
The United States, with or without Obama, cuddles up with Arabs, Iranians, and now, even the Moslem Brotherhood. Why? Because what they see in the world are 1.4 billion Moslems and a lot of oil, which is still a strategic weapon that they now hope to use in the renewed Great Game which they think they can play against the combination of Russia and China.
Israel must find ways to make itself useful to Russia, China, India, and Japan. And I am certain that is precisely what Israel will do in coming decades, when it becomes clear that those four countries increasingly and collectively are overcoming the economies and the military strength of Western Europe and even North America, if government and society in the USA degenerates as much as it has since World War II.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
@ ArnoldHarris: Sorry, Russia is providing serious weapons to the Iranian, Syrians and Hezis. They are part of the problem not solution.
@ yamit82:
@ Laura:
Yamit, Laura;
You both should take into account a strong possibility that Russia’s interests in the increasingly complicated and widespread wars building up in the Middle East will coincide with Israel’s interests. I think it is axiomatic that Israel must have friendly and dependable relationships with the Eurasian powers — Russia, China, India, and Japan — as they do with the USA and Canada.
Remember always, that countries have no permanent friends and allies; only permanent interests.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
To hell with Russia. Israel need only to take its own interests into account.
Naftali Bennett’s stability initiative – Doing what’s good for Israel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1oFOEY_6lM&feature=youtu.be