by Isi Leibler
 |
President Obama’s abysmal
failure to provide leadership during the Syrian crisis represents a
turning point in the Middle East and has paved the way for President
Putin’s Russia to emerge as the dominant regional force, a position it
had surrendered after the breakup of the Soviet Union.
To avert abject humiliation,
Obama has absurdly spun the situation into a victory achieved by the
American threat of military force. Instead, it was Putin who played the
role of international statesman and masterminded a watershed moment for
the Middle East, in which Russia effectively supplanted the US as world
leader.
Were Assad to actually dismantle
his chemical stockpiles, Putin would have made an important
contribution to regional peace and stability. Alas, the likelihood of
this happening is exceedingly remote.
Given the barbaric civil war
raging throughout Syria, and the history of Syrian lies and deceit, it
is virtually impossible to establish any meaningful form of surveillance
or control.
Nonetheless, Putin has established a significant role for himself in the Mideast region.
In the process, he has
potentially enabled Assad to emerge a victor, despite until now having
been embattled and on the brink of collapse. The stated deadline is only
mid-2014. Already, there are reports that Assad has dispersed and
concealed his chemical weapons. With the passage of days, weeks and
months, interest in controlling his stockpiles will wane and the
possibility of taking action will be effectively forestalled. There will
be no consequences to Assad’s actions, since Russia endorsed and the US
capitulated to his demand that an agreement eschew any mention of
reverting to military action should he renege on the deal.
In orchestrating his maneuvers
in Syria, Putin has demonstrated not only his support of Syria and Iran,
but his ability to stand up and deliver on behalf of his allies. Putin
achieved regional hegemony through Russia’s alliance with a broad Shiite
arc that encompasses Iran, Syria, and Lebanon and is likely to include
Iraq. Egypt is currently out of the equation, but in the past it was the
most stalwart of America’s regional allies. Today, it distrusts the
Obama administration for its abandonment of Mubarak and its support of
the Moslem Brotherhood regime, making it similarly susceptible to
Russian influence.
Putin’s objective is to
re-create a bipolar global dynamic in which Russia is the dominant
power, demonstrating a determination to confront and undermine America
on virtually all issues. While he is condemned in the Western world for
his authoritarian rule, brutal suppression of dissidents and failure to
root out rampant corruption, despite his country’s economic and military
limitations, he has harnessed Russia’s energy resources to make
impressive progress. .
Putin has now successfully
promoted himself as an international statesman and will undoubtedly
continue to exploit nationalism and anti-Americanism in order to raise
his standing within his domestic constituency. His rhetoric reflects
this new approach. He did not attempt to morally defend Assad’s actions.
Indeed, President Reagan would turn in his grave were he aware of the
sanctimonious and cynical paraphrase of his sentiments by Putin in a
recent New York Times article, stating, “We are all different, but when
we ask the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us
equal…We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of
civilized diplomatic and political settlement.”
These developments inevitably
revive memories of the Soviet Union’s nefarious role in the Middle East
during the Cold War and its collusion with Arab states attempting to
destroy the Jewish state. It is also reminiscent of the global
anti-Semitic campaigns that culminated in the infamous UN resolution
that equated Zionism with racism.
But it would be incorrect and
misleading to place Putin in the same category as the leaders of the
Evil Empire. Unlike the pathological Soviet anti-Semites, Putin has not
displayed a hatred of the Jewish people. On the contrary, he selected
Israel as the first country he visited after his election and, while
here, repeatedly remarked on how pleased he was to visit a state that
included more than a million Russian-speaking citizens. He even warned,
however disingenuously, that the Syrian rebels were preparing for a
poison gas attack against Israel.
But this should not mislead us
into regarding Putin as a philo-Semite. Rather, that he will collaborate
with Israel if it best serves Russia’s objectives. However, he has
continuously employed the Russian veto at the UN Security Council in
relation to Iran and Syria, and has supported the Iranians, despite
their nuclear ambitions which pose an existential threat to Israel.
Indeed, there are now reports
that the Russians will provide Teheran with highly advanced defense
systems, including five batteries of state-of-the-art S-300
anti-aircraft missile systems, which will certainly make any future
military intervention far more hazardous. The Russian media has also
reported that in the course of his forthcoming meeting with Iranian
President Hassan Rohani, Putin is likely to offer a new nuclear reactor.
The most serious fallout from
the Syrian debacle is the Iranian perception of Obama. His threat to
intervene militarily if the Iranians sought to achieve their nuclear
objectives was always in doubt but now it has simply become a joke. Not
surprisingly, Teheran has praised the US for employing “rationality”.
This will oblige Israel to make some very difficult decisions in the
near future.
Israel must now persuade Russia,
with whom it has developed good relations in recent years, to draw the
line at providing weapons to its allies that would undermine Israel’s
security and power of deterrence. This will test the influence of former
Russians like Avigdor Lieberman, who claims to enjoy a unique
relationship with the current Russian leadership. However in light of
recent events, we must be aware that Putin’s total focus on furthering
Russian influence in the region may lead to his abandonment of Israel in
the process.
Israel must not allow itself to
be drawn into the regional turmoil. We must deny Assad’s demand that
Israel ratify the chemical weapons agreement before Syria does. We must
reject Putin’s hint that Assad’s chemical weapons were a poor man’s
deterrence against Israel’s nuclear power. We must also be prepared for
the possibility that the Obama Administration may intensify pressure on
us to “make greater sacrifices” to reach a settlement with the
Palestinians in order to divert attention from its dreadful failure in
Syria.
The unfolding of the Syrian
story serves to underline the message: while Israel must retain the
support of the American people and Congress in order to combat global
political pressures and to withstand Russia’s increasingly active role
in the region, we must depend on ourselves and forgo illusions of
relying on US military support. As Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu
said, quoting Ethics of the Fathers following the Kol Nidre service on Yom Kippur at my Synagogue, “If I am not for myself, who will be for me?”
He may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com
This column was originally published in the Jerusalem Post and Israel Hayom
Isi Leibler's website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com.
Source: http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=4808
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment