by Dan Margalit
|
In his book "From
Beirut to Jerusalem," New York Times journalist Thomas Friedman wrote
about his chilling visit to then-President Hafez al-Assad's Syria in the
1980s. Friedman visited Hama, a city that had rebelled against the
Assad regime. Hafez Assad had ordered the mass murder of his political
rivals, with many being buried alive, in what Friedman then termed "Hama
rules." Cruelty is apparently a gene that can be passed down from
generation to generation. On Sunday, President Bashar al-Assad, Hafez's
son, ordered an airstrike that killed dozens of innocent civilians
waiting in line for bread. Incidents like this, albeit on a smaller
scale, are happening in Syria every few days.
The natural and obvious
assessment is that Bashar Assad will not remain in the presidential
palace in Damascus for much longer. How long can he hold onto power with
an army that controls only a quarter of Syria's territory? The outcome
is inevitable. According to one report, the U.S. and Russia have reached
an agreement that Assad will be exiled to a foreign country. Syrian
Vice President Farouk al-Sharaa has called for negotiations because even
Assad knows that his military cannot win the civil war.
But there will be a
significant time period between the issuing of statements that Assad is
finished and Assad actually leaving power. During this time, events may
occur that are fateful to the future of Syria and the Middle East. Syria
will not experience an "Arab Spring." Instead, it will go through a
dark and stormy winter.
Western nations are now
aiding the Syrian rebels more than in the past. The West is sending
weapons and ammunition to the rebels, but it is not publicly admitting
to these actions and it is not dispatching military forces to Syria.
This is mainly to avoid a confrontation with Russia, which still has
many existing interests tied to the Assad regime. Russia is preventing
the Assad regime's downfall, even though the regime has continued to
make unfounded claims and unfulfilled promises.
Israel has so far not
intervened in the situation in Syria. Even Arab countries have not
jumped in to save Syria's civilians from being massacred.
The fall of the Assad
regime will be received in Israel with mixed feelings. On one hand,
there is a great chance that Assad's downfall will cut off a vital link,
for which there is no substitute, between the Iranian regime in Tehran
and the Hezbollah organization in Beirut. A blow like this to Iran will
significantly strengthen Israel's security.
On the other hand, two
generations of leaders from the Assad family have maintained the
cease-fire on the Golan Heights since June 1974. There is no guarantee
that this quiet will hold after a regime change in Syria, especially if
the central authority in Damascus is weak and the country is divided
into feudal-like tribal districts.
Experts in Syrian affairs cannot
give the Israeli government an authoritative answer on which is the
lesser of two evils. Whoever takes over in Damascus and controls the
Syrian military will receive a huge chemical weapons arsenal. Damned if
you do and damned if you don't, the saying goes. As long as Assad ruled
his country with an iron fist, it was safe to assume that he would not
use his chemical weapons rashly. It is unknown whether his successor
will act similarly. Either way, it is clear that Israel will have to
flex its muscles more than it did in the past year, during which calls
were heard to reduce the defense budget.
|
Dan Margalit
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=3110
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment