|
|
Raising the Stakes
| Article
# : |
12211 |
|
|
Section : |
CURRENT ISSUES
|
| Issue
Date : |
2 / 1987 |
2,542 Words |
| Author
: |
Avigdor Haselkorn
|
The Syrian military buildup is worrisome, not because it unequivocally indicates a Syrian intention to go to war, but because it provides Damascus with the option to resort to conflict at some propitious moment in the future.
Concentrating on the absence of Syrian motivations to launch large-scale hostilities fails to appreciate other politico/strategic consequences of Syria's attainment of nominal "strategic parity" with Israel. Even if it did not alter Damascus' inclination to go to war, the Syrian military buildup has influenced President Hafez Assad's conduct both regionally and toward Israel. For example, many observers have commented on the new "recklessness and boldness" of the Syrian leadership exemplified by the substantial evidence linking Syria directly to the plot to bomb an El Al plane last April 17. What a contrast to the standard diplomacy of terror, which demands secrecy and that the recipient of deadly messages suspect - but never be able to prove - who sent them. Israeli observers have begun to speak of a systematic Syrian campaign to "nibble" at the Israeli Defense Force's strategic advantage. These activities, however, cannot be viewed as unrelated to the probability of another Syrian-Israeli war. Nor can it be assumed that Assad is unaware of this link.
Given the prevailing assumptions about each other's basic motives, there seems to be no point where equilibrium can be reached: the more Assad is determined to achieve a "strategic balance" with Israel, ostensibly to deter the latter from taking advantage of the favorable geopolitical conditions produced by the Camp David "conspiracy," the more the Israelis are convinced of his warlike intentions. As former chief of IDF intelligence Maj. Gen. Ehud Barak said: "Syria was power-seeking, extreme, and gearing up for a confrontation." Therefore, for Israel to resist pressures to preempt, superiority over Syria is a must. Conversely, for Damascus to feel secure in the post-Camp David era, a strategic balance with Israel is not only a "legitimate right" but in fact a "sacred duty." Under these circumstances, Israeli military sources who recently termed a war with Syria as "inevitable" were closer to the truth than those analysts seeking solace in the apparent lack of war-making motivation among all of the concerned parties.
Against this backdrop, the Iranian arms "scandal" besieging the Reagan administration could not have come at a worse time. A prolonged paralysis in the American government can encourage radicals in the Middle East to increase their pressure, including against Israel. Already there are indications that the recent Libyan offensive in northern Chad was launched in part out of a belief that Washington was preoccupied with its domestic crisis. Tripoli Radio on November 26, for instance, said that the administration in Washington has "collapsed" and that president Reagan himself "appeared to be confused and perturbed" during a recent press conference. Similarly, Damascus' Al-Ba'th expressed the opinion three days later than the U.S. administration was "now in a state of imbalance" and has "even lost confidence in the United States itself."
Increased dependency on the USSR?
It would appear that two mechanisms may work to increase Syrian dependence on the Soviet Union in the near future. First, as one observer correctly noted, "Syria in effect has created a force structure that heightens Israel's incentive to preempt or reach
...
Read Full Article
|
|
