NYT Op-Ed: A Conflict That Will Stay Close to Home (re Arab world)

By EDWARD M. LUTTWAK
Chevy Chase, Md.

IT is obvious by now that Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah and Hamas is part of a larger conflict largely paid for and directed by Iran and Syria. To divert attention from its nuclear ambitions, Iran undoubtedly sanctioned Hezbollah’s adventurism into Israel last week. Syria harbors Khaled Meshal, the political leader of Hamas, and fully supports its actions.

So, could the fighting widen across the region? It is possible, of course, but not likely.

First, Hamas is very isolated, with no local allies other than Syria. As the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in Egypt and is dedicated to overthrowing the government of Hosni Mubarak, Hamas can hardly expect any help from Egypt, by far Israel’s most powerful neighbor.

Likewise, the Muslim Brotherhood of Jordan is the main political opposition to the royal family. Since April, when the Jordanian government intercepted weapons coming from Syria and intended for Hamas, it has barred Hamas officials from its territory.

As for Hezbollah, the Israeli bombing of Lebanon is arousing some Arab solidarity in the region. But all know that the Israelis are acting only incidentally against Lebanon and that their target is Hezbollah, which deliberately started the fighting by crossing into Israel. Much more important, other Arabs view Hezbollah as the paid agent of its Shiite brethren, the leaders of non-Arab Iran. That makes it much easier for Sunni Arab states like Egypt and Jordan to stay on the sidelines.

Likewise, Saudi Arabia, another Sunni-ruled country, quickly came out against Hezbollah and Iran through its official news agency, which said, “A distinction must be made between legitimate resistance and uncalculated adventures undertaken by elements inside Lebanon and those behind them.”

In the Arab world, only Syrian President Bashar al-Assad supports both Hamas and Hezbollah. Would he help both by, say, opening a new front on the Golan Heights? Syria has large artillery forces that could quickly launch a tremendous barrage; it has missiles than can reach deep into Israel, and its armored forces and commando units could go into action almost immediately.

On the other hand, Syria has never violated the 1974 cease-fire on the Golan Heights, not even in 1982 when the Israelis destroyed Syrian forces in Lebanon. The Syrians know that even if they struck first, the Israelis would retaliate very quickly by bombing Syrian air bases and by destroying electrical power stations, oil refineries, major bridges and the like. And the Syrian Army would undoubtedly suffer heavy losses once the Israelis mobilized their reserve divisions, in less than 48 hours.

Most important, Mr. Assad must be concerned that his regime, narrowly based on the loyalty of the small Alawite religious minority to which he belongs, would be overthrown if the country suffered a major military defeat.

Which brings us back to Iran. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been threatening Israel with destruction daily and keeps denying the Holocaust in a manner that reveals his own genocidal fantasies. But as of now, Iran has no military capacity against Israel other than a few unreliable ballistic missiles imported from North Korea whose warheads could fall just about anywhere. Even if by some miracle they were to hit a city or town in Israel, their conventional explosives would not inflict much damage anyway.

On the other hand, an Iranian missile attack would give Israel the opportunity to strike Iran’s nuclear installations without provoking global outrage. It would be a very serious act of war, but it would not stir the Arab states to aid Iran’s mullahs: they, too, fear a nuclear Iran.

Much is at stake in the current crisis: Israel’s security; Lebanon’s viability as a nation; the future roles of Hamas and Hezbollah; America’s ability to function as an effective power in the Middle East; and more still. There are dangers on every side. But, fortunately, the outbreak of a regional war is not one of them.

Edward N. Luttwak, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is the author of “Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace.’’

 

 

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 18th, 2006 at 9:25 AM and filed under Articles. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.