Le Monde diplomatique
 The Nation
Richard Bulliet
Rami G. Khouri
Peter Kwong
Patrick Seale
Immanuel Wallerstein
|
Rumours of War| by Patrick Seale | Released: 26 Apr 2010 |
There is no denying the mood of acute anxiety in the Middle East: Many fear that war could break out this summer. The scenario most often evoked is that of another Israeli assault on Lebanon -- an expanded version of the 2006 attack -- which this time could grow into a wider conflict, dragging in Syria, and even Iran, as well.
Jordan’s King Abdullah has warned of the danger of a regional war, while the Lebanese Druze leader, Walid Junblat, has said that Israel was waiting for the right conditions to attack the Arab world.
Certainly, Israeli leaders have not hesitated to stoke the fires of war. President Shimon Peres -- Israel’s wolf in sheep’s clothing -- heightened regional tensions this month by publicly accusing Syria of delivering SCUD missiles to Hizbullah in Lebanon -- an accusation so far unproved, but which has earned Syria a sharp rebuke from Washington.
An unnamed Israeli minister was quoted by Britain’s Sunday Times as saying that, if Hizbullah dared to launch a missile at Israel, “we will return Syria to the Stone Age -- crippling its power stations, ports, fuel storage and every bit of strategic infrastructure.” So much for good-neighbourly sentiments!
Peres has also issued a dark warning to Iran of Israel’s military “capabilities” -- drawing an expression of regret for such arrogant belligerence from the left-leaning newspaper Haaretz. Needless to say, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, like Peres himself, never misses an opportunity to demonize Iran, portraying the Islamic Republic as a deadly threat, not only to Israel but to the whole world. Netanyahu has repeatedly hinted that, if the United Sates failed to halt Iran’s nuclear program, Israel would have to do the job itself.
Iran, meanwhile, has not been idle. It has sought to rally international opinion against the tougher sanctions the United States is seeking to impose on it. It has also denounced as “nuclear terrorism” America’s new nuclear posture -- which singled out Iran and North Korea as potential targets for nuclear attack.
This past week, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps carried out large-scale war-games in the Gulf and in the Straits of Hormuz, including the testing of missiles, with the declared aim of “maintaining security for oil routes” -- a way of saying that the security of this vital region could not be left to an external power like the United States. Iran would dearly like to see U.S. forces removed from its immediate vicinity.
What lies behind Israel’s shrill war propaganda? There would seem to be at least three prime motives. First, by threatening its neighbours with war, Binyamin Netanyahu’s right-wing government seems anxious to shift Washington’s attention away from the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and towards an alleged threat from Iran, Syria and Hizbullah. Israel has been disturbed by reports from Washington that U.S. President Barack Obama, anxious to break the current deadlock, might publish his own peace plan and seek to impose it on the parties.
This is Netanyahu’s greatest fear. He immediately rejected any form of an “imposed” settlement, while dismissing Obama’s call for a building freeze in Arab East Jerusalem. Like the far-right members of his ruling coalition, Netanyahu is a Greater Israel ideologue, totally opposed to Palestinian nationalism and to the emergence of a viable Palestinian state. He may well calculate that a small war could weaken the Arab camp and win time for Israel to continue its seizure of Palestinian territory.
In accusing Syria of delivering advanced weapons to Hizbullah, a second Israeli motive could be to sabotage any U.S.-Syrian rapprochement. The U.S. Senate has been debating whether to confirm the appointment of Robert Ford as American ambassador to Damascus -- the first in five years. Pro-Israeli senators have tried to delay or cancel the ambassador’s appointment, objecting that it would reward Syria’s “bad behaviour.”
In beating the war drums, a third Israeli aim would seem to be to disrupt the Tehran-Damascus-Hizbullah axis, which Israel sees as a challenge to its strategic hegemony over the region. It is evident to most observers that neither Iran nor Syria -- still less Hizbullah -- would consider attacking Israel, as they are well aware that the Israeli response would be devastating. But they do want to be strong enough to dissuade Israel from attacking them. That is called deterrence. And that, in Israeli eyes, is where the threat from them lies.
Israel does not want any of its neighbours to be in a position to defend itself. That is why it has made such a fuss over the alleged delivery of missiles to Hizbullah. It wants to be able to hit, but never to be hit back.
Israel’s concern is that its 60-year military dominance over the Arabs may be coming to an end. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States have acquired considerable quantities of modern armaments. Hizbullah has acquired an arsenal of rockets which provides it with a certain deterrent capability. And Iran’s rise as a regional power threatens to restrict Israel’s freedom of action.
It would, therefore, not be wholly surprising if some Israeli hawks dream of a war which, like the 1967 war, would restore Israel’s hegemony for the foreseeable future, and allow the Greater Israel project to proceed unchecked.
Patrick Seale is a leading British writer on the Middle East. His latest book is The Struggle for Arab Independence: Riad el-Solh and the Makers of the Modern Middle East (Cambridge University Press).
Copyright © 2010 Patrick Seale – distributed by Agence Global
---------------
Released: 26 April 2010
Word Count: 856
----------------
Rights & Permissions Contact: Agence Global, rights@agenceglobal.com 1.336.686.9002, or 1.212.731.0757
|
|
