By Jonathan Cook – Nazareth
Palestine Chronicle
".......So what does Israel consider in its interests if neither Assad’s survival nor his removal is appealing?
According to some well-placed Israeli commentators, the best Israel can hope for is that Assad holds on but only just. That would keep the regime in place, or boxed into its heartland, but sapped of the energy to concern itself with anything other than immediate matters of survival. It would be unable to offer help to Hizbollah, isolating the militia in Lebanon and cutting off its supply line to Iran.
In closed-door discussions, analyst Ben Caspit has noted, the Israeli army has put forward as its “optimal scenario” Syria breaking up into three separate states, with Assad confined to an Alawite canton in Damascus and along the coast.
A long war of attrition between Assad and the opposition has additional benefits for Israel following the decision by Hizbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, to draft thousands of fighters to assist the Syrian army. Protracted losses could deplete Hizbollah’s ranks and morale, while fighting is likely to spill over from Syria into Lebanon, tying up the militia on multiple fronts.
But there is a risk here too. If Hizbollah performs well, as it did in defeating the rebels this month at the town of Qusayr, its position in Lebanon could be strengthened rather than weakened. And in that situation Assad’s debt to Hizbollah would only deepen.
Such calculations are doubtless exercising Israeli military minds.
The greatest danger of all is that yet more parties get drawn in, turning the conflict into a regional one. That would be the likely outcome if Israel chooses to increase its interference, or if the US comes good with its recent threats to increase military aid to the opposition or impose a no-fly zone over parts or all of Syria.
Either way, Israel might see the transformation of Syria in to a new mini-cold war theater as advantageous."
No comments:
Post a Comment