Written by Michael Warschawski, Alternative Information Center (AIC)
Immediately following the Lebanese fiasco last summer, I wrote: “The question is not whether there will be a second round, but only when will it be.” The 2007 Strategic Situation Evaluation of the Israeli military prepares the ground for the next Israeli military venture, stating: “The risk of an explosion on the Syrian-Lebanese front will increase this year.” This leaves one question open, however: from which side is the risk coming? The Israeli military’s evaluation points its finger, indirectly, at the Arabs: “For the first time after many years, there is no positive window of opportunity in the area.” i.e. no Arab window, because, as everyone knows, the Israeli window is always open for peace and reconciliation.
Yet, this is obviously a cheap form of propaganda. In the last months, Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad has publicly approached the Israeli government with several requests to open peace negotiations, without any preconditions. Moreover, Israeli intelligence has confirmed on several occasions that Assad is indeed sincere in his statements about a peace agreement with Israel; something which could help to break the Iranian-Syrian block. According to Avi Dichter, Israeli Minister of Interior Security and former Chief of the Security Services, this is “an important strategic goal for Israel.”
If a break on the “Eastern Front” could be a strategic achievement for Israel, why, therefore, does Israel reject Syrian calls for peace negotiations?
The answer is in Washington: for the neoconservative administration, Syria belongs to the axis of evil; as such, it is a target, not a partner. A target, in George W. Bush’s never-ending preemptive war against international terror. The fact that the American voters, as well as the Hamilton-Baker bipartisan commission, have challenged this war strategy does not seem to have any impact on the hard-line neocons in Washington. Bush has just decided to increase the number of US soldiers in Iraq, and is ready to enter into a head-to-head conflict with the US Congress, which he attacked last week in an unprecedented manner.
As with last summer, Washington is pushing the Israeli government to war, supported by the Israeli military, which desperately wants a second chance to regain its sense of deterrence in the region.
While it is obvious that Israel has nothing to gain from a new military venture in the north, and, on the contrary, a lot to gain by opening peace negotiations with Syria, the fact is that there is no real political opposition in Israel. Amir Peretz, in whom a majority of the Israeli peace bloc in the last elections invested their hopes for a real change, became the chief-spokesperson for the war policy, leaving a free hand to war adventurists and their plans for a second round in Lebanon.
Olmert, Peretz and Ya’alon should not, however, forget the reality of resistance in our region, from Basra to Gaza, from Bint-Jbeil to Jenin. For one lesson has been taught to the whole world, by the resistance fighters of Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon: military superiority is no guarantee of victory.
Hamilton and Baker have just learnt the lesson, and one can guess that, despite their arrogance, the Israeli leaders will learn it too. Let’s hope that it will happen before the peoples of the region, including the Israelis, will have to pay too high a price.