In January 2006, Raghida Dergham, New York bureau chief for the
London daily Al-Hayat, published an analysis titled "Various
Scenarios That Would Prompt an Israeli Strike on Lebanon and Syria."
In one of the scenarios she described, Syria and Iran would try to
draw Israel into a war by using Hizbullah and Palestinian factions,
with the aim of easing the international pressure on them.
The following are excerpts from the English translation of the
article, which was posted on the author's website:
Iran and Syria "Might Consider It in Their Interest to Provoke
Israel Through Hizbullah and the Palestinian Factions"
"There is talk within international circles about various scenarios
that would influence decisions relating to the existence of Syria
and Hizbullah; these international circles also warn that attacking
Israeli towns from across the Lebanese border could entail
repercussions on all of Syria and Lebanon. This is not random talk,
but is based on indications that Syria will most probably resort to
measures that would prompt an Israeli attack on Lebanon and Syria.
In addition, there are indications that Syria will stir up the
Palestinian-Israeli scene by activating and empowering pro-Syrian
Palestinian factions.
"When it comes to Lebanon, the most important link through which and
on which measures will be taken is Hizbullah, which possesses tools
allowing it to implement or disrupt any measures. That's why the
responsibility of implicating Lebanon in an Israeli attack or
invasion falls on the shoulders of the Hizbullah leadership, which
is required to choose today between fortifying Lebanon against
being used for revenge or any other reason and between sacrificing
it to the benefit of Syria or Iran.
"At this juncture, the leadership in these two countries might
consider it in their interest to provoke Israel through Hizbullah
and the Palestinian factions, either to divert attention and
pressure away from them or to mobilize anti-Israeli sentiment for
local and regional consumption. The situations in Syria and Iran are
completely different, but the means and tools for effecting change
are the same for Damascus and Tehran, namely, [through] Hizbullah
and the Palestinian factions present in Lebanon and those that
receive money, aid and
weapons from Syria and Iran."
"Any Cross-Border Operations That Hizbullah Would Conduct Into
Israel Would Be Considered a Calculated Decision Calling for an
Israeli Strike on Lebanon"
"Moreover, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's extremely
deteriorating state of health places matters in an even more
dangerous realm. For it is in such transitional periods that states
become even more prepared and eager to resort to big military
operations in order to prove that they are capable of keeping things
under their control. For this reason, any cross-border operations
that
Hizbullah would conduct into Israel, at this point, would be
considered as a calculated decision calling for an Israeli strike on
Lebanon. And any Syrian encouragement for such a development would
also be considered as a dormant [Syrian] desire for provoking an
Israeli strike on Syria, something which would lead Damascus to
raise hell in the Arab region for being in a state of war with
Israel."
Larijani Threatened That "If the U.S. and Israel Commit any
'Mistake' With His Country" They Would Enter "A Hell Which They
Could Not Easily Come Out of "
"The secretary-general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council,
Ali Larijani, warned the day before yesterday [January 4, 2006]
against pushing his country 'into adopting another option that had
been planned in advance,' in terms of the nuclear weapons dossier,
so that it could confront pressures that are meant to deprive Tehran
of 'its right' to nuclear enrichment and to [possessing] technology
for the production of nuclear fuel. Larijani threatened with
'dragging the region into war' if Tehran is forced to give up
nuclear enrichment, and he also warned the United States and Israel
of committing 'any mistake' with his country, noting that Iran had
already 'prepared a scenario to
respond to this matter', and he threatened with 'a hell which they
could not easily come out of.'
"Although there might be divisions within the ruling leaderships in
Iran, it is clear that Iran places its nuclear ambitions above all
considerations and it is willing to use Palestine and all Arabs to
accomplish its goals.
"Larijani's statements are not just talk, but they are the epitome
of frankness and truth when it comes to Iran's priorities and the
means for achieving them. His threats of 'dragging the region into
war' and his acknowledgment that Tehran had plotted for the option
of war, in advance, is a clear indication of Iran's commitment to
using others to implement its own nuclear strategy..."
"The Catastrophe Scenario... is a Scenario of 'If We Go Down, We All
Go Down Together' - A Scenario That Would Call for Blowing up the
Lebanese Situation"
"The main scenarios being discussed within international circles,
regarding Syria, are three: In the first scenario, Syrian President
Bashar Assad would reach the conclusion that in order to save Syria
from sanctions and punishment, and in order to save himself from
being held to account, he would have to follow a course of action
that is fundamentally different from the one he has been following
up till now. And this would require him to sacrifice anyone and
everyone who played a role and was implicated in the assassination
of the Lebanese former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, even if they
were among his closest relatives or if they held the highest
[government] ranks.
"If Bashar Assad managed to take such a decision and implement it,
he would have made a historic contribution in saving Syria from
punishment, and with that, he would have placed his country above
and beyond the regime, contrary to what ousted Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein had done...
"...The second scenario being discussed within international
circles... is the scenario of coups d'état, most notably, a Sunni
revolt in alliance with key Alawite figures, which would spare the
country a major turbulence or a catastrophic war...
"What's important is that the second scenario, which has been dubbed
the 'middle' scenario, is regularly being discussed and taken into
account, and it is being prepared in a number of capitals and with
the involvement of more than one person, especially since
Abdel-Halim Khaddam is not the last episode in the [series of]
confessions [expected] from Damascus, but he could be the first...
"What Khaddam has offered, up till now, in his public declarations,
and his claim that he has more to disclose, allows for a qualitative
change in the investigation because Khaddam considered the Syrian
president a party in the 'instigation' [against Hariri], something
which raised pressures on Damascus to unprecedented levels,
particularly since the investigation committee has publicly
requested to interrogate the Syrian president as witness, after it
had requested to interrogate his brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat,
chief of Syrian military intelligence, as 'a suspect.'
"This substantial development could prompt Bashar Assad to become
convinced of the need to adopt a policy of qualitative change in his
course of action, but it could also prompt him, on the other hand,
to resort to complete escalation, since there is no option other
than him. Such an escalation brings us to the third scenario, which
is known as the 'catastrophe scenario.'
"The catastrophe scenario does not protect Syria or the ruling Baath
regime, but it is a scenario of 'if we go down, we all go down
together' - a scenario that would call for blowing up the Lebanese
situation.
"Specifically, it is about blowing up the situation on the border,
through the Shebaa Farms and utilizing Hizbullah and the Palestinian
factions. It also involves the blowing up of Lebanese-Lebanese
relations, both at the sectarian and party levels, and fabricating
problems within the internal Lebanese scene. It also involves
instigating a Lebanese-Palestinian confrontation and not just
provoking a Lebanese-Syrian confrontation. But this scenario will
not be satisfied with just blowing up the Lebanese scene but its
goal is to drag the entire region into a regional war. For what is
being said in international circles is that the attempts to instill
terror in the hearts of Lebanese through the series of
assassinations [that have taken place] have proved to be a failure,
because Lebanon remains cohesive and it did not succumb to a civil
war, as Syria would have wished for.
"For this reason, the only alternative option right now is to
completely and qualitatively change the course of action so that the
confrontation would become at all levels by using all Lebanese and
Palestinian actors in order to provoke Israel into grand-scale
measures that would change the focus of discussions away from
Syria's role in Lebanon and the international community's holding
Syria to account for the actions made by its military leadership.
"So which of these scenarios is forthcoming? The answer is still not
clear...
"What remains is that the biggest responsibility, at the Lebanese
level, falls on Hizbullah, as it would have to decide for the last
time if it is truly a Lebanese party and a Lebanese citizen or [if]
it is a soldier that executes the Syrian or Iranian order of
'dragging the region' into war and turning Lebanon into a 'scene of
hell', to the benefit of Iran's nuclear [agenda] or to exempt Syria
from being held to account for the assassination crimes..."
http://www.raghidadergham.com/archive/4rdpast1_06_06.html
|
|
