One thing that puzzled be at the time things kicked off in Syria was why the Israelis never took the chance to level a few scores with the regime, which was certainly no friend to them. With that in mind, is there a plausible way to get the Israelis involved in the Syrian wing of the Arab spring on the rebel side (assuming here that it will be in the early days when there are still moderates in the leadership of the rebels)?
AHC/WI: Israeli in the Syrian Spring
- Thread starter MattII
- Start date
PsihoKekec
Banned
Arabs have been ''conditioned'' to hate Israel by decades of propaganda. Israel openly supporting the rebels would weaken their support amongst the people.
Israel also started two unprovoked wars (The Suez Crisis and the Six Day War), invaded Lebanon on more than one occasion with spectacularly terrible results, and treats the Palestinian peoples horribly. There's plenty of reasons the Arab world doesn't like Israel that have nothing to do with propaganda or conditioning.
As to the OP if the Israelis did that then any popular support for the rebels would go right out the window. Israel doesn't meddle like that in Arab politics because the few times, like Lebanon, they've tried it backfired spectacularly.
Any interference by Israel of any sort has as its most likely outcome the ending of the civil war and the solidification of Assad's control while causing his policy towards Israel (which is a sort of détente with a smidgen of rabid-yet-cordial hatred that provides both administrations with bogeymen that are valuable for their internal PR narratives) to harden.
Except actually killing Assad, which has as its most likely outcome the ending of the civil war with a hardline Islamist group in charge which will not display Assad's restraint when it comes to Israel - note, for instance, that when Israel attacked the Syrian nuclear programme, Assad did not counterstrike Dimona, say. Not so say that a Syrian missile/air strike would be successful - I mean, there is a reason the IDF spends all that American aid on those cool toys - but it would be really embarrassing if one unlucky Scud in a salvo overwhelmed the area defence systems and ended up cracking a reactor vessel to make a big chunk of the Negev glow in the dark.
The plain fact is that whatever Israel thinks of Assad, he's hamstrung in his own actions against Israel while he's fighting a civil war, and it's really unlikely that deposing him will result in a regime which is as positive* towards Israeli interests (including shenanigans in Lebanese politics) as Assad's one. Which is quite a depressing thought, if you live in Tel Aviv.
* Well, maybe not even more overtly negative would be better phrasing here.
Last edited:
Israel has, in fact, fired shots and done at least one airstrike I can think of in Syria (usually against Iranian targets) and I believe let some refugees into Golan Heights. They can't go any further for fear that it will strengthen Assad's position ("Look, those terrorists work for Jews!").
To get Israel intervening, you'd need a different government around in 2011 - and a very arrogant one.
To get Israel intervening, you'd need a different government around in 2011 - and a very arrogant one.
As far as Israel is concerned, the Assad government is probably it's best option. It's militarily subordinate and accepts that role. Israel was more than prepared to tolerate Syria's indefinite occupation of Lebanon for instance, as being in Israel's interests. Israel has no real concerns with Assad's human rights abuses, pre-civil war massacres, etc. As far as Israel is concerned, the Assad government was a state that met its needs perfectly.
It was not prepared to trust or have any faith in a Lebanon not controlled by Syria - hence the war there. It was not prepared to trust or have faith in any genuine reformist or democratic movement - since a Syria which was embraced by the west and the United States would be a threat (however small) to Israel's place at that tit. It was certainly not prepared to trust or have faith in a radical or islamist government which might become actively hostile and dangerous in unpredictable ways.
So if they were going to intervene for anyone.... It would be Assad.
It was not prepared to trust or have any faith in a Lebanon not controlled by Syria - hence the war there. It was not prepared to trust or have faith in any genuine reformist or democratic movement - since a Syria which was embraced by the west and the United States would be a threat (however small) to Israel's place at that tit. It was certainly not prepared to trust or have faith in a radical or islamist government which might become actively hostile and dangerous in unpredictable ways.
So if they were going to intervene for anyone.... It would be Assad.
The Cosmonaut Cat
Banned
John Farson
Banned
For the past four years Israel's main Syria strategy has been to stay firmly on their side of the Golan ceasefire line and not touch the abattoir with a hundred foot pole, except when their intelligence has detected something that's threatened their interests - namely, weapons supplies for Hezbollah - or targets of opportunity. Other than that, Netanyahu doesn't want to get involved in any way whatsoever.
I'm going to dispute that. I've read a lot of the diplomatic correspondence on this, and that's not an accurate portrayal. Nasser was being extremely provocative, and while I wouldn't argue that he had any real intention to invade Israel (he was mostly looking to turn up the temperature and get concessions), he drastically misunderstood the post-Holocaust psychology of the Israeli leadership. They were legitimately afraid of an all-out Arab invasion, and kept pushing the Americans to pull the Egyptians back. Eventually, after a narrow vote in the Cabinet, they pulled the trigger on a war, seeing a preemptive strike as the only way to win. Now, I don't think that fear would have come to pass, but Nasser really didn't think closing the Straight of Tiran and mobilizing armoured units in the Sinai through all that well.
Egypt, Jordan, and Syria invaded Israel on May 14, 1948. You can't exactly say they declared war since they never recognized that Israel existed in the first place.
Egypt did not conclude a peace treaty with Israel until March 26, 1979.
Jordan did not conclude a peace treaty with Israel until October 26, 1994.
Syria has never concluded a peace treaty with Israel.
Israel did not "start two unprovoked wars." It launched preemptive military strikes during the war in response to hostile actions taken by Egypt, particularly the closing of the Straits of Tiran.
I won't dispute your other statements, though the situation is far more complex than that.
Egypt did not conclude a peace treaty with Israel until March 26, 1979.
Jordan did not conclude a peace treaty with Israel until October 26, 1994.
Syria has never concluded a peace treaty with Israel.
Israel did not "start two unprovoked wars." It launched preemptive military strikes during the war in response to hostile actions taken by Egypt, particularly the closing of the Straits of Tiran.
I won't dispute your other statements, though the situation is far more complex than that.
Right, because it's not like Israel armed and trained anti-Syrian militias in Lebanon for years before actually intervening militarily, or anything like that...
Israel stopped opposing Syria in Lebanon because the price was too high, not because they were okay with it.
Last edited: