Israel will continue doing the dirty work in Syria - by Jonathan S. Tobin

So the next time you hear about the United States defending Israel, remember that on this strategic front, it has been Israel that is defending the West’s interest in preventing Iran from getting even stronger than Obama and Trump’s blunders have made it.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
JNS.org..
14 January '19..

For some observers, this past weekend’s revelations about Israeli strikes against Iranian targets in Syria was just politics as usual in the Jewish state. Some pundits treated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s public acknowledgement that the Israel Defense Forces has struck specific Iranian military targets in Syria as an attempt to distract the voters from his personal legal woes in advance of the April elections.

Similarly, there might be those who consider outgoing IDF Chief of Staff Gen. Gadi Eizenkot’s exit interviews with the Israeli and international press in of the same ilk. He, too, spoke about the army’s ongoing duel with Iran’s Quds Force and its Hezbollah auxiliaries in recent years as evidence of his desire to puff up his image before eventually turning (like so many other top officers) to politics.

But taken together and coming after U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement that he will be withdrawing U.S. troops from Syria, the unavoidable conclusion about these statements is that, while Israel’s operations there have been an open secret never before publicly acknowledged, the Jewish state is sending a clear message to Tehran. After years of pounding Iranian forces on the quiet, Israel’s security establishment feels the time is right to make it clear that it will continue to enforce certain red lines in Syria to ensure that the Islamist regime isn’t in position to launch a war on its northern front.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

A sine qua non of both the Israeli ethos and the bilateral alliance — that Israel defends itself by itself - by Evelyn Gordon

...two basic facts. First, there are things Israel needs from Trump more than troops in Syria. And second, asking America to keep soldiers anywhere for Israel’s sake violates a sine qua non of both the Israeli ethos and the bilateral alliance — that Israel defends itself by itself.

Evelyn Gordon..
Algemeiner..
05 January '19..

Like most pro-Israel commentators, I’m appalled by US President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw American forces from Syria. Nevertheless, this is the wrong issue for pro-Israel activists to pick a fight over. Criticizing the decision on grounds unrelated to Israel — of which there are many — is fine. But to imply that US troops should remain in Syria for Israel’s sake is to betray the fundamental tenet of the American-Israeli alliance: Israel will defend itself by itself; it will never ask America to put soldiers in harm’s way for its sake.

It’s worth underscoring just how unique this makes Israel among American allies. America has fought to defend Europe repeatedly. It fought for South Korea in the 1950s, South Vietnam in the 1960s, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in 1991. And there’s an understanding, often anchored in bilateral or multilateral treaties (such as NATO), that America would fight for many other allies if necessary, like Japan, Canada or Australia.

But with Israel, the agreement has always been that Israel would see to its own defense, while America would provide it with the means to do so. That arrangement suited both sides. For America, it was much less costly in terms of both lives and money than having to defend Israeli militarily (a point I explained in detail here). And for Israel, it satisfied a deeply ingrained lesson of Jewish history: Relying on others for protection always ends badly for the Jews.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Can the US Withdrawal from Syria Be a Blessing in Disguise? - By Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen

However misconceived, President Trump’s decision to withdraw US forces from Syria might have a silver lining for Israel. It forces Jerusalem to reevaluate the basic assumptions of the “peace process” with the Palestinians that has been actively and coercively led in recent decades by successive US administrations.

Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen..
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,051..
30 December '18..
Link: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/us-withdrawal-syria-blessing/

The Oslo process took place under unique global circumstances. The Soviet Union had just collapsed and the Cold War had come to an abrupt end with the West’s clear victory. The US became “the only remaining superpower” and the “End of History” loomed over the horizon.

Since then, far-reaching changes have taken place. Russia has reemerged as a major global force and has reassumed its great-power status through direct military interventions in Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria. The US, by contrast, has substantially reduced its global involvement over the past decade and has lost its hegemonic position in the Middle East. In this respect, President Trump’s recent decision to withdraw US troops from Syria is but the continuation of the disengagement policy begun by his immediate predecessor.

It is arguable, of course, that the withdrawal casts serious doubt on the credibility of the US as a strategic ally. Yet for all its attendant flaws, this step gives Israel a chance to reconsider its longstanding belief in seemingly unshakable US backing.

For quite some time, the Jewish state has found itself in a strategic quandary. On the one hand, the more omnipotent the American image, the stronger Israel’s reputation as a major military and political player. On the other hand, the widespread belief in Washington’s ostensible ability to guarantee any Arab-Israeli peace agreement has placed Jerusalem under constant pressure to take the risks associated with withdrawal from areas vital to its national security. Thus, for example, by way of paving the way for the IDF’s total withdrawal from the West Bank as part of an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, the Obama administration proposed a complex security package that substituted the deployment of US forces in the Jordan Valley for Israel’s longstanding demand for defensible borders (accepted by Security Council Resolution 242 of November 1967).

But to what extent can foreign military forces operating in a wholly alien environment provide an adequate substitute for the IDF in enforcing the West Bank’s demilitarization? Judging by the experience of international forces in the Middle East in recent decades, the answer is far from satisfactory.

Amidst Chaos, Israel-Syria Border a Tinderbox

Counteracting the explosiveness of the situation are a few stabilizing factors. No side in Syria is keen on opening a front with Israel and facing the IDF's firepower when it is neck-deep in a fight to the death in the Syrian civil war. Additionally, localized incidents, as again demonstrated last week, can, through a careful combination of firm responses and restraint, be contained by Israel. In today's chaotic and unpredictable regional reality, however, Israel is not relying on these factors.

Yaakov Lapin..
Gatestone Institute..
09 December '13..

Three instances of cross-border fire have occurred along Israel's frontier with Syria in the past week, reinforcing the Israel Defense Force's assessment that this border is set to present a mass of security threats in the near future.

In the most recent incident, a bomb planted by unknown attackers along the border fence, detonated as an IDF patrol passed by, damaging the vehicle. It represents just the sort of incident that, if repeated, could escalate into a potential kidnapping or deadly attack on soldiers, precipitating an Israeli response -- which in turn could lead to a wider escalation.

The IDF's Northern Command has, in fact, been preparing intensively for this scenario, training patrol units to respond quickly to attacks, and constructing a missile-proof border fence with hi-tech sensors and an early warning system to provide some cover.

The Israeli military has not yet been able to determine who carried out the recent border bombing, but foremost among the suspects are Syrian jihadi elements that form part of the armed opposition to the Assad regime.

Extremist jihadi factions, such as the Al Nusra Front (Al-Qaeda's official branch in Syria), and The Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria maintain a continuous presence in southern Syria along sections of the Israeli border, taking part in daily armed clashes with Assad loyalist forces for control of villages in the area.

The jihadis may be busy with Assad's army, but in line with their radical ideology, could still choose to strike out at Israel. Such groups are difficult to deter: they are not sovereign rulers of clearly demarcated territory, meaning that there is no clear "return address" for an Israeli retaliation, and they have not experienced Israeli counter-terrorism action.

The opposite is true of both Hezbollah in south Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, which have their own territory and, despite being heavily armed, are, for the time being, deterred by previous Israeli operations against them.