by Isi Leibler
 |
There is currently a remote
possibility that the Russian strategy will succeed in averting US
military action by persuading Assad to hand over his chemical weapons of
mass destruction for demolition by the international community. But
even if that happens, President Obama’s vacillating response to the
horrors in Syria will still be considered another manifestation of
America’s ongoing erosion of its superpower role as guardian of the free
world against the burgeoning forces of Islamic terrorism.
In the absence of effective
presidential leadership, the American people have grown weary of
shouldering the burden of policing the world and sending their
youngsters to battle extremists in faraway places. Obama’s policies have
dramatically revived America’s dormant isolationist inclinations.
This is fortified by the
Europeans who, absorbed by post-modern moral relativism, refuse to share
the burden and are now barely willing to even symbolically endorse the
engagement of the United States in global military initiatives to
contain Islamic terror. Burying their heads in the sand, Western nations
seem to deny that Jihadism, much like Nazism and communism, represents a
fundamental threat to Western civilization and if not confronted, will
ultimately wreak havoc in their own neighborhoods.
The procrastination and
unpredictability of President Obama has already convinced US allies,
including the so-called moderate Arab states, that America has become a
paper tiger. Understandably, they no longer believe that they can rely
on a vacillating, indecisive Commander-in Chief. In their eyes even the
ineffective former President Jimmy Carter appears like a valiant warrior
compared to the dithering Obama.
This attitude is unlikely to
change irrespective of whether Congress endorses President Obama’s
request to punish Assad for gassing his own people. Even if Congress
approves an American strike it will be a limited maneuver neither
intended nor likely to produce regime change. It will probably have
negligible deterrent effect and may even enable Assad to portray himself
as the heroic victor who triumphed against the mighty US.
Israel stands in a difficult
position in the midst of the tension. Understandably, it is unwilling to
side either with the murderous Assad or the monstrous Al Qaeda
terrorists now dominant amongst the Syrian rebels. There is little doubt
that we would wish a plague on both their houses.
But Israel recognizes that if,
after Obama’s repeated promise to act if Assad crossed the “red lines”
and employed chemical weapons, Congress rejects his request for a
military response, the weakened President would suffer further
humiliation, highlighting US impotence and strengthening the
isolationist trends that have already dramatically impacted on American
public opinion. This would have severe negative ramifications on Israel
and the entire region and, above all, embolden the Iranians towards
attaining their nuclear objective.
Conscious of the overriding
Iranian issue, Israel does not wish to see Congress humiliating the
President in this context. But it is also highly concerned neither to
become embroiled in the Syrian civil was nor lay itself open to
accusations of dragging America into a new conflict.
Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu is to be credited for acting with diplomatic astuteness. He
has muzzled his traditionally outspoken and irresponsible ministers. He
has succeeded in walking a diplomatic tightrope in avoiding humiliating
Obama whilst simultaneously sending a clear message to the Syrians that
were they to implement their threats to attack Israel, we would not
remain passive as we did during the Iraqi war.
American Jewish organizations
find themselves in a bind. In a bizarre turn of events, the Obama
administration has turned to Israel and AIPAC to lobby Congress on its
behalf. The major American Jewish organizations reluctantly responded
positively and urged Congress to endorse the President’s request but are
attempting to distinguish this from their traditional pro-Israel
lobbying. However it is a no win situation. Should Congress approve a
military strike, they will face accusations of dragging their country
into a new conflict. Conversely, should Congress reject Obama, the
intervention will result in severely damaging the standing of the Jewish
lobby in the American political arena.
As far as Israel is concerned,
it is crucial that in conjunction with increasing Islamic fundamentalist
threats in the region, we factor into our strategic planning the new US
isolationism and European indifference. We must absorb the reality that
we are a people who stand alone and can depend on no one but ourselves
to deter our adversaries.
Our greatest concern remains
Iran. If the US and the West are incapable of deterring Iran from
developing a nuclear bomb, we will be obliged to make difficult
decisions, weighing the diplomatic consequences and considering the
practicality and chances of success in initiating independent action.
This must also serve to
strengthen our resolve to bury any remaining delusions that we can rely
on third parties to guarantee borders or intervene in a crisis in
relation to the Palestinians. In this Alice in Wonderland environment,
the US and the Western European countries are unlikely to ease pressures
on us to make further unilateral concessions. Even our “friends” are
more inclined to focus on the construction of homes in the Jewish
suburbs of Jerusalem than Syrians massacring of thousands of their own
people.
Therefore, in the foreseeable
future, in the absence of Palestinian leaders genuinely committed to
peaceful coexistence, it would be insane for us to succumb to global
pressures to make further unilateral concessions, ease security or cede
additional territories without genuine reciprocity.
At the same time we should take solace in the fact that there are also positive developments that benefit us.
Despite the Obama
administration’s retreat towards isolationism, the American people and
Congress continue to enthusiastically support Israel. This is of
critical importance because, whereas we have never asked the US or any
other country to engage in wars on our behalf, the US backing ensures
that we retain the edge with access to the latest technological military
equipment and enables us to defend ourselves and effectively deter the
barbarians at our gates.
This also makes it unlikely that
US would totally abandon us in the diplomatic and political arena, and
would continue acting as a barrier against those seeking to impose
sanctions against us.
Despite the active presence of
jihadists amongst our neighbors, at a time when the military power of
some of our most committed adversaries has dramatically eroded, our
military strength is at an all-time high. This significantly diminishes
the threat of a conventional war of aggression against us. In fact, the
IDF today is capable of deterring all our adversaries combined. We must
of course continue to strengthen and develop our military superiority.
Another important positive
development for Israel has been the Egyptian revolt against the Moslem
Brotherhood regime, preventing the rise of an Islamic totalitarian
dictatorship. This represents a major body blow to Hamas, effectively an
extension of the Moslem Brotherhood and considered as such by the new
Egyptian regime. It has already resulted in military action against the
jihadists in Sinai, lessening a major threat to security on Israel’s
southern border.
Overall, when one balances the
positive developments within the regional turmoil, it is clear that
despite frequent gloomy and pessimistic chatter, we can regard Israel’s
position as one of strength.
He may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com
This column was originally published in the Jerusalem Post and Israel Hayom
Isi Leibler
Source: http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=4802
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment