Syria's scuds
Issandr El AmraniHow exciting to see all the hullabaloo about reports that Syria gave scuds to Hizbullah! And to see somber-faced officials in Washington (although few) and Tel Aviv speak of this as some kind of provocation. Funny that this move, if true (US and Israeli officials don't have a great track record on these things — remember Saddam's WMDs?) would apparently justify a bombing raid on Lebanon.
On the one hand, if I were Lebanese, I would certainly to increase my country's defensive capabilities considering that Israel destroyed half the place in 2006. I would be focusing first on air defenses to take down aircrafts coming into my airspace, but longer-range rockets that can do similar damage to what Israel did to me (and it invaded me three times, occupied me for two and half decades, and regularly violates my sovereignty) would seem a good dissuasive measure.
On the other hand, when does anyone complain about Israel's weapons acquisitions or its ability to annihilate the entire neighborhood?
In other words, I am all for any actor in Lebanon making it more costly for Israel to repeat its 2006 exercise in collective punishment.
Syria, of course, is a nasty little regime and has done tremendous damage to Lebanon. At one time, though, it was seen as a stabilizer in Lebanon and actually committed enough to the status-quo that it would not risk any confrontation with Israel. Perhaps these calculations have changed, but considering the low effectiveness of Scuds (remember the Gulf War and the Israeli panic that didn't amount to much) I don't see how this can be construed as a game-changer. Lebanon and Syria both endorsed the Arab Peace Initiative and back the peace in exchange for the return of land. We are being told by some experts in America and Israel that it's not reasonable for Syria to expect the Golan Heights back. These are the same people who essentially argue it's not reasonable for the Palestinians to expect a viable state. Is everyone in the region supposed to accept a belligerent Israel, protected from any responsibility under international law, that refuses to make clear what its own borders are and regularly engages in attacks on its neighbors' territory?
Here's some commentary:
- Andrew Tabler, who lived in Damascus for years and is hawkish on the regime, in: Inside the Syrian Missile Crisis | Foreign Policy
- Another Syria expert, the more dovish Joshua Landis reminds everyone of the bigger picture: the Golan Heights, Syrian concerns about Israel preparing another one of its little excursions, etc.: What Is Behind the Scud Scare -- Syria, Hezbollah, and Israel?; Josh Landis, Syria Comment | The Middle East Channel
- Also at FP, Blake Hounshell somewhat bizarrely calls Syria The dumbest country in the Middle East even though he acknowledges that the allegation is unverified.
- The satirical take from the Qnion: Scudding Right Along « Qifa Nabki | A Lebanese Political Blog
Reader Comments (6)
I don't think you can call Surface-to-Surface missiles defensive weapon. Perhaps you mean deterrent weapons and these are not the same thing.
You are right of course regarding the double standards issues, and that there is little justification for the commotion. The issue for Israel is really psychological, little else.
But Scuds suggest to me that the Hizbulla is exercising poor judgement - again. It is over-estimating its ability. These are big, heavy missiles which require careful storage and an elaborate operation to transport and launch - which makes them much easy targets. Hizbulla's long range missiles were destroyed in the first days of the 2006 war, and quite likely this will happen again with the scuds. While in fact, its short-range rockets, small and primitive, proved a much bigger challenge to Israel, and allowed it to claim victory (of sorts) in the last round.
This infatuation with big missiles suggests to me little more than militaristic bravado. And a waste of money (whose, I'm not sure).
This will liekly be yet another paper-thin invitation for Israel to bomb Lebanon and porbably some Syrian site or two.
Here I don't blame Israerl, for Israel has always been a criminal state, crimes is what it does.
The real blame lies in Lebanon which has neglcetd any kind of defense and entirely relies on Hezbollah, who no matter how good can only do so much (where was the Lebanese "army" in 2006?).
Equal blame lies on Syria which years ago took the insane decision to abandon its air force development for silly useless tanks and scuds. Apparently the lessons of the 1991 Gulf War passed over their heads.
It is important to speak about against criminality and aggression, there comes a time when the victims must also fight back,
No offence but the comments so far assume that the reports are truthful and the intelligence can be trusted. I smell another WMD debacle/disaster.
Mink - I see your point about this perhaps being a mis-step by Hizbullah, but on the other hand I agree more with Palestinian: we just don't know that these reports are true, and after the last decade I certainly wouldn't trust any Israeli officials nor do I put much credence in American ones.
What was Hezbollah's excuse for violating Israeli territory, murdering and kidnapping Israeli servicemen and then, when Israel responded proportionately by sending tanks in to retrieve its soldiers, subjecting a million Israelis to carpet bombing? The State of Israel has the responsibility to defend its people. Who does Hezbollah answer to, the Lebanese people or to Iran?
I'm just wondering, because you seem to imply that Israel's war against Hezbollah in 2006 was a mere function of instinctual Zionist savagery. Whereas, the two states which have made comprehensive peace with Israel - Egypt and Jordan, have not had a single violation of their sovereignty by the Israelis in 40 years.
Funny how that works: make peace with the Jews, and you'll have peace with the Jews.
Victor, you are completely disingenuous: if the 2006 war was just against Hizbullah, why did the Israelis attack civilian areas, factories, roads, all the way up to North Lebanon that had nothing to do with Hizbullah.
If Israel had reacted only against Hizbullah, you may have had a point. But it decided to pursue collective punishment: that is savagery.