

July 13,
2006
Syria’s Role in the Current Israeli-Palestinian
Confrontation
Eyal
Zisser
Moshe
Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
Early
in the morning of June 27, Israel Air Force planes broke
the sound barrier as they flew over the palace of Syrian
President Bashar al-Asad in the Asad family’s hometown
of Qardaha. That action was apparently driven by a
lesson learned from a similar overflight four years
before, in the fall of 2002, which was intended to warn
Asad against escalation of the situation on the
Israeli-Lebanese border but failed to impress him
because he was completely unaware of the overflight at
the time and only learned about it from Israeli media
reports several weeks after the event.
The
latest Israeli overflight came two days after Hamas
activists attacked an Israeli army position on the
border between Israel and the Gaza Strip and managed to
abduct an Israel soldier and spirit him back to Gaza.
That attack was apparently carried out on the direct
orders of the Hamas leadership based in Damascus,
especially the Chairman of the movement’s Political
Bureau, Khaled Mash’al. Thus, the IAF overflight was
meant to send a clear warning to Asad that continued
support of Mash’al and his comrades could cost Syria
dearly.
Up
till now, however, the overflight has produced no
discernible results and Asad has apparently chosen to
ignore the Israeli signal and to persist in his course.
At first, the Syrian media totally ignored the Israeli
overflight; only after it was widely covered by Israeli
media did the Syrians hasten to report that their air
defenses had driven off Israeli warplanes that had
penetrated Syria airspace. Syrian spokesmen also
condemned the “Israeli aggression” and repeatedly
insisted that the Hamas people living in Damascus under
Syrian protection confined themselves to political and
informational work and had no involvement in the
military activity against Israel carried out by Hamas in
the West Bank and Gaza.
Hamas
is not the only Palestinian terrorist organization with
operational headquarters in Syria. The others include
the Islamic Jihad, led by Ramadan Shallah, and Ahmad
Jibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine-General Command, which operates against Israel
mostly from Lebanon. All these headquarters enjoy full
freedom of maneuver in Syria, which allows them to raise
funds (mostly from Iran) and transfer them to the
territory of the Palestinian Authority as well as to
prepare plans and transmit orders without having to
worry about interference by Israeli security services.
Syria
continues to support these terrorist organizations even
though it has been under severe pressure for several
years to stop doing so. This pressure is part of a
wider campaign led by Washington to secure Syrian
cooperation on a range of issues, including the threat
of radical Islamist terrorism in Iraq and the question
of Lebanon. American efforts to coerce Syria began
after the American occupation of Iraq in the spring of
2003 and reached a peak in 2005, following the murder of
former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri in
February of that year, when a UN commission of inquiry
strongly hinted that Bashar al-Asad was implicated in
the assassination.
However,
the international pressure on Syria has substantially
subsided since early 2006. The Americans backed off
from accusations that Syria was responsible for the
terrorism in Iraq, and the head of the UN commission,
the German judge Detlev Mihlis, was replaced by a
Belgian investigator; Serge Brammertz, who has taken a
much more muted position on the question of Syrian
culpability in the murder of Hariri. Finally, France, a
key member of the international coalition demanding the
removal of Syrian forces from Lebanon, has shown less
enthusiasm for continuing pressure to end other sorts of
Syrian involvement in Lebanon.
These
developments explain the relative complacency of Bashar
al-Asad in the face of the latest Israeli threats. He
undoubtedly believes that these threats are just as
hollow as a string of previous Israeli and American
threats also turned out to be, notwithstanding the
presence of more than a hundred thousand American troops
just to the east in Iraq.
Consequently,
Bashar has stuck to his strategic position and refuses
to entertain the idea of responding to any of these
pressures without some politically significant quid
pro quo (such as revival of negotiations with Israel
over the Golan Heights) or of abandoning his policy of
providing support for Palestinian terrorist
organizations, especially Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
Indeed, Bashar has apparently concluded that standing
firm in the face of American and Israeli pressure not
only will not weaken him domestically but will actually
enable him to mobilize broader public support both at
home and throughout the rest of the Arab world.
Moreover, in adopting this posture, he runs very little
risk of American or Israeli military action because such
action – however threatening the rhetoric may seem – is
not a viable option for either Washington or Jerusalem.
In
fact, the Syrians apparently think that their standing
in the region has improved and that they have regained
the central role that the Bush Administration has tried
to deny them. After all, would-be mediators are coming
to Syria and requesting Bashar’s help in resolving the
current Israeli-Palestinian crisis, because it seems
that the road to Khaled Mash’al, hence, to the release
of the captured Israeli soldier, must pass through
Damascus. It is therefore not surprising that Bashar
has chosen to ignore the Israeli overflight of his
palace, just as he has ignored other signals sent by
Israel and the United States over the past six years.
___________________________________________________________________
Tel Aviv Notes
is published by
TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY
The Jaffee Center for
Strategic Studies
www.tau.ac.il/jcss/
& The Moshe Dayan Center
for Middle Eastern and African Studies
http://www.dayan.org/
through the generosity of
Sari and Israel
Roizman, Philadelphia
Published
by permission at Israeler.com
Back to Contents
|