Submit your comments on this article | ||||||
Israel-Palestine-Jordan | ||||||
Debka: Assad trusts Obama to tie Israel's hands against major reprisal | ||||||
2013-08-28 | ||||||
![]() There is little logic in the Netanyahu government's public assurances that the Syrian ruler Bashar Assad would not risk a major showdown with Israel for fear of an IDF response powerful enough to overthrow his regime. This argument fails to take into account the calculus in Washington: President Barack Obama would not countenance, at least in the initial stage, an Israeli military strike on a scale greater than the limited operation he is contemplating for his own armed forces in the wake of the Syrian government's chemical weapons attack on Damascus last Wednesday, Aug. 21. Israel would therefore not be allowed to endanger Assad's rule.
According to military sources, Israeli strategists prefer to believe that Syria will choose Jordan for a conventional missile strike in reprisal for a US attack - rather than go for Israel. This assumption was refuted by the words of Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem Tuesday, Aug. 27, at a press conference he held in response to US allegations of his government's responsibility for using chemical weapons in East Damascus. Accusing the US Secretary of State John Kerry of telling lies and fabricating evidence against his government, Moallem insisted it had not used chemical weapons or delayed permission for the UN team to launch its investigation under guaranteed security in government-controlled sites. That team only arrived Saturday, Aug. 23, and was not ready for its mission before Monday, Moallem insisted.
When Moallem said Tuesday that Syria would defend itself in the case of a US strike "using all available means," he felt safe in including Syrian allies in this category. Those allies are evidently resolved not to stand by idly if Syria is attacked.
Jerusalem as well as Washington realizes how widely the fallout may spread, but Israeli leaders are keeping this prospect under their hats to avoid public panic.
| ||||||
Posted by:3dc |
#5 I can't imagine Assad or anyone else on the international scene trusting Obama. And I'm pretty sure the Israelis would not bet their survival on him either at this point. |
Posted by: SteveS 2013-08-28 21:37 |
#4 ZF, I'd agree with that, because otherwise its in Israel's interest for the war to drag on for years with Assad eventually winning, but the country wrecked for a generation. |
Posted by: phil_b 2013-08-28 16:59 |
#3 So why are Israeli officials so pro-rebel? My guess is that Israeli officials are afraid of Syria playing the Cuban role in a new missile crisis, once Iran gets its nukes up and going. That would reduce Israel's reaction time significantly in the event of a Syrian launch. If online commentary from English language Israeli news sites is any indication, popular opinion in Israel does not favor the Syrian rebels. However, the Israeli leadership is trying to get Assad toppled by hook or by crook before the Iranians get their nukes on line, on the assumption that the Iranians wouldn't place them in a Syria dominated by Sunni Islamists who view exterminating Shiites as the first order of business before embarking on a world tour with Allah's personal assistance (i.e. Koranic catastrophes like plagues, floods, et al, inflicted on the non-Muslim heathens). Ultimately, the way to deal with Iranian nukes is to bomb the Iranian nuclear program, not create an al Qaeda government in Syria. Obama doesnÂ’t want to bomb Iran, so this is the alternative weÂ’re left with. |
Posted by: Zhang Fei 2013-08-28 12:28 |
#2 I can see a scenario where Israel gets a free shot at Iran's nuclear program. It's an ill wind etc. |
Posted by: phil_b 2013-08-28 05:07 |
#1 See also TOPIX, WORLD NEWS > WHITE HOUSE: SYRIA OPTIONS NOT ABOUT REGIME CHANGE. and * RELATED GLOBAL TIMES > [Xinhua] US OPTIONS AIMS NOT AT REGIME CHANGE: OFFICIALS. So-called "Obama Doctrine" being violated by its Obama namesake??? |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2013-08-28 03:03 |