Posted By Joshua Landis
Thursday, April 15, 2010 - 2:18 PM
Share
Reports in U.S. and Israeli papers on Wednesday, alleging that Syria delivered Scud missiles to Hezbollah, has set off a firestorm about the limits of engagement and the danger posed by Syria and nonstate actors in the region. Yet the ensuing debate has ignored the broader context of which this episode is but a symptom: namely, that the continued lack of resolution to the decades-long conflict between Syria and Israel has been allowed to fester.
This new development could not have been better timed to throw a monkey wrench into Washington's engagement process with Syria and President Barack Obama's efforts to reanimate the stalled peace process in the region. Robert S. Ford, the first ambassador named to Damascus in five years, is in the midst of his confirmation process. A key committee in the Senate has recommended his confirmation, but the ultimate vote among the full Senate has yet to take place. There are many who would like to stop it, not the least because Obama seems ready to push forward efforts to resolve the long-festering Arab -Israeli conflict. On Tuesday, he declared that solving the dispute was a "vital national security interest of the United States" because it is "costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure."
In the short term, the White House's desire to help broker a Middle East peace means getting an ambassador back to Damascus and engaging with Syria. In the long term, it means convincing Israel to return the Golan Heights, a large swath of land that Israel conquered from Syria in 1967 and annexed in 1981 (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed not to return it). Obama's urgency to solve the Arab-Israeli dispute is causing some pro-Israeli groups to push back with the claim that the president is unfairly blaming Israel for the lack of movement on peace talks. Meanwhile, a Syrian Foreign Ministry source says that:
Israel is launching a campaign of statements alleging that Syria is supplying Hizbullah Party in Lebanon with SCUD missiles...Syria, while strongly denying these allegations, believes that Israel aims through them at adding more fuel to the tense atmosphere in the region and to create a climate that paves the way for a potential Israeli aggression in order to evade the requirements of just and comprehensive peace.
Has Syria supplied Hezbollah with Scud missiles? The short answer is that we don't really know. The story was first announced by Israeli President Shimon Peres, who told journalists earlier this week, "Syria claims that it wants peace, while simultaneously delivering Scud missiles to Hezbollah, which is constantly threatening the security of the state of Israel." The Wall Street Journal went further than the Israeli press by claiming that "U.S. officials" as well as Israelis have alleged that Scuds have been transferred from Syria into Lebanon. The Washington Post, however, took a more cautious stand. It quoted a U.S. official briefed on the matter to say, "I don't think we know whether they've gone over or not." The New York Times followed suit by explaining that "American and French officials have both said that they were aware of the Israeli concerns but did not know whether the missiles had actually been delivered."
A little history can help remind us how difficult it is to detect Scuds, which are easily concealed in a truck. During the 1990-1991 Gulf War, Israeli intelligence kept providing the U.S. Air Force (USAF) coordinates for emplacements of an even larger form of Scud (modified for extended range by the Iraqis). Thiry-nine of these wobbly rockets were fired at Israel while 41 were targeted at Saudi Arabia. All of the Israeli data, assessed by Mossad to have high validity, turned out to be worthless. When this proved to be so, every intelligence resource the USAF had was dedicated to finding the Scuds being fired at Israel and Saudi Arabia. With very few exceptions, the missiles were located only when their launching gave them away. Because satellite intelligence on Scuds is unreliable, this is undoubtedly why both French and U.S. intelligence officers are loath to confirm Israeli claims about the Scuds.
The larger question, however, is not whether Syria has delivered Scuds to Hezbollah. Syria has been rebuilding Hezbollah's missile supplies ever since they were largely exhausted during Israel's 2006 incursion into Lebanon. It will continue to do so as long as Israel refuses to trade land for peace. Syria says it will no longer have any reason to arm Hezbollah once it gets the Golan back and can sign a peace agreement with Israel.
Syria understands that the reason Israel will not return the Golan Heights is because of the terrible imbalance in power between the two countries. So long as there is no peace, Syria will feel compelled to arm itself and its allies. Only this week at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, we were reminded that Israel has hundreds of atomic warheads that can be delivered by missile, plane, and submarine. What's more, Washington continues to supply Israel with large amounts of military aid and cutting-edge military technology. Israel accuses Syria of trying to change the balance of power by introducing Scuds to Lebanon, but from Syria's point of view, it is Israel that has skewed the regional balance.
Israeli officials, when faced with the Golan question in private or at conferences, explain that the reason Israel refuses to strike a deal with Syria is that the country is too weak. It has nothing to give Israel in exchange for the Golan, which has been Israel's quietest border for 35 years. In the face of this debilitating weakness, Syria will do what all weak states do: find powerful allies and try to arm itself. It must also rely on nonstate actors, such as Hezbollah and Hamas. In short, it will struggle to right the balance of power. Some commentators have argued that Syria ought to simply renounce its current path, make a rapproachment with the West, and by doing so get back the Golan and normalized relations. But the notion that Israel would give Syria back the Golan if it renounces Hezbollah and Iran is naive. The Palestine Liberation Organization renounced violence some time ago and has little to show for it.
King Abdullah of Jordan has recently warned that an Israel-Hezbollah-Lebanon war may be "imminent" if peace is not advanced. And Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a similar point at the recent AIPAC meeting when she urged both sides to make peace:
Both sides must confront the reality that the status quo of the last decade has not produced long-term security.… We must recognize that the ever-evolving technology of war is making it harder to guarantee Israel's security. For six decades, Israelis have guarded their borders vigilantly. But advances in rocket technology mean that Israeli families are now at risk far from those borders. Despite efforts at containment, rockets with better guidance systems, longer range, and more destructive power are spreading across the region. Hezbollah has amassed tens of thousands of rockets on Israel's northern border. Hamas has a substantial number in Gaza. And even if some of these are still crude, they all pose a serious danger, as we saw last week.
It is thus clear that the only long-term solution to Scuds or the more serious problem of nuclear proliferation in the region is peace. A Syrian-Israeli peace is not impossible -- President Bill Clinton got close in 2000. President Obama can still do it. If he cannot, we will be hearing much more about the spread of missile technology as well nuclear technology.
Joshua Landis is the director of the Center for Middle East Studies and associate professor at the University of Oklahoma. He is the author of the blog Syria Comment.
AFP/Getty Images
EXPLORE:MIDDLE EAST, MIDDLE EAST, LEBANON, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, SYRIA, TERRORISM, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY 
There has been a recurring theme in recent reports pointing to IDF's nukes. IDF had nukes for a long time and it is being existentially threatened by syrias supply of scuds, irans nuclear program and stone throwing palestinians. It is time to recognize the real danger faced by israel and not talk about the nukes it really needs.
It's good to see Tabler and Landis go head to head, and I score this one as a win for the latter.
The Syrian regime is realist--brutally so, but realist nonetheless. Did we expect that they would lay down all their cards simply because we've eased our rhetoric and nominated an ambassador?
Reports suggest that the Syrians continue to arm Hizbullah to the teeth. I believe them.
But other reports indicate that the Syrians have been cooperating with Washington and Riyadh on the Iraqi portfolio. And anyone who follows insurgent discourse knows that many of the non-Al-Qaeda factions--i.e those who presumably received years of tacit support from Damascus--now complain loudly of problems procuring money and weapons... Might the Syrian regime have played a helpful role on this front?
I don't know. But we should all keep in mind how complicated our relations with Damascus have become, and how many issues will ultimately require their cooperation.
Even while the u.s is trying to be diplomatic with Syria, the syrians spit in the face of the u,s Assad junior made fun of obama when ahmedinajad visited and said that they will not cut relations no matter what, the question is do the syrians really want peace?, the only reason that Assad has so much power is the excuse of fighting Israel, otherwise he looses his legitamecy in the eyes of the syrians, that is why they have special milirtary rules etc, the syrians are ruining Lebanon they have been sucking that country dry for years assasinating anyone who doesn't do as they wish, and are suppporting almost every terror organization in the world, if assad signs peace do you think he wants Israelis in damascus, the syrian people will want change and that will mean the allawis won't be in power anymore,Syria is always willing to fight Israel as long as they don't have to fight let's have the Lebanese and the palestinians die for us. They are responsible for a lot of U,S deaths, don't forget the speacial operation the u,s did on syrian land, they tried to devlop nuclear weapons, and they are a very brutal regime. So peace sounds good yet is it realistic to make peace with such forces , maybe?
Why would Israel lie about the syrians? Why would they train the hizbullah in how to activate and shoot those missiles if they are not planing to give them, and maybe they have not gave them yet but they trained them , the author implies Israel is lying, but since when have the syrians been telling the truth?.
The author says balance of power is ok through terror as long as there is a balance haahahaha.
Good pat on the back of terrorists there Joshua, keep encouraging them , I am sure that will bring a "solution," what will we say if the terror wins can we give up to such things, what kind of message are we sending? You get your political and regional goals achieved through terror?
Let me explain something to you, who are u going to belive a democracy with open government or a terror supporting sponsoring country which is a dictatorship, and was caught building nuclear weapons ask the u.n.
Yes countries might lie about things during war, what reason would Israel have to lie about the incident and to who? The U.S, you don't think that the u.s is smart enough to figure out who is telling the truth and that they don't have enough intelligance on the syrians????
Honestly who is the naive one here, you choose to be naive because it serves your political views and you can pretend to put us on the same moral ground .
No question who gets it right ... Dr. Landis is the most constructive and best informed Syria expert in the United States.
Mediating peace in the Middle East requires abandoning the set of shiny moral values that Israel's supporters in the United States work so hard to place at the center of any debate on the issue.
Israel's supporters, including the on-line soldiers hired recently by Israeli foreign ministry to show up in the comments sections of every post on the topic(see: http://current.com/1u67m4c) want the readers to believe that the conflict is about a trustworthy, democratic, moral, civilized Israel that is trying to survive among the terrorists and the states that support them .. all working hard to end the beautiful democratic freedom and peace loving country .. Israel.
The fact is that after 19 years of trying (1991 to 2010) to achieve a peaceful settlement with Israel that is based on the full return of the Golan Heights (67 borders) as stipulated by UNSC resolution 497 (signed by the United States and all other 14 members of the SC), Syria is starting to lose any hope in Israel's intentions.
Why lose hope?
Israel's Leadership is dangerous ... one that would demonize its friends if they dare to criticize Israel. Likud power broker, Moshe Feiglin, said this week: "When the state’s leadership lets Biden or Erdogan or any other diseased leper humiliate us, it sows the hope and uncontrollable desire of destroying us."
Israeli people do not give a damn about peace anymore. Google for example Newsweek's article last week titled:
"Who Needs Peace, Love, And Understanding, Anyway? Why many Israelis now believe that pursuing peace with the Palestinians is passé."
Syria will get back its Golan Height in full. Anyone who tries to promote a solution based on suggesting to Syria to settle for less is telling the Syrians and the Arabs that because Israel is powerful and dangerous, UN resolutions should be tweaked to please Israel.
If the United States continues to extend preferential terms to the powerful and dangerous Israelis in a way that allows them to continue to illegally violate tens of UN resolutions, be prepared for every Arab and Islamic nation (or party) trying to show the United States that they too are powerful and dangerous.
Israel, and the way the United States is pampering it, is dangerous in many ways. We need to go back to respecting and abiding by United Nations resolutions in full.
When Syria was indirectly named in UN resolution 1559 which asked for "foreign troops" to leave Lebanon. Syrian troops were out of 100% of Lebanon within few months. Israel, in comparison, continues to occupy the Syrian Golan Heights 28 years after UNSC resolution stated "Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights is null and void"
When we discuss SCUD missiles in Lebanon, we need to start with the occupied Golan Heights.
The problem with U.S Middle East schoolars
"Dr. Landis is the most constructive and best informed Syria expert in the United States."
I don't know about dr. Landis but the problem with most of U.S schoolars that are so called "experts" on the middle east is that they don't speak or read a shred of Arabic and they get most of their info from translations and second hand. How can you be an expert on Syria when you don't speak arabic, same goes for the incompetants at the sate department most of the middle eastern studies faculties in the u.s are filled with either arab schoolars who present a biased view towrds the middle east , and are funded by arab monry so that the arabs can take over the public opinion. This way "experts" they have their own little influencial group.
otherwise how can you explain the terrible reads the u.s had on Afghanistan and Iraq.
The problem is that while Prof. Landis is touting the idea of "peace" within our time, he goes little into what would be expected from this state of affairs.
.
One can reasonably extrapolate the expectations of peace between Israel and Syria from the relationships Israel has with the other two Arab states that have signed peace agreements with it.
.
In the 30 years following its peace treaty with Israel, Egypt from the populace on up, reject its terms. The sad reality is, there has been no normalization between the two nations. Scholars and diplomats have pointed out the deep domestic and intra-Arab state relations that form a real block to any sort of peace that one would expect to find at the end of hostilities. However, in this case, Israel is treated as an enemy state by the populace and government.
.
So too with Jordan, where its laws and power blocks work to prevent any normalization beyond the walls of the Hashemite throne.
.
Given this reality, neither record provides reason for great enthusiasm. As TRANSTRIST pionted out, Bashar Assad is already on record refusing to end his alliances with Iran and Hizballah. Both groups outright reject Israel's existence, in its entirety and call for its destruction.
.
Whether one can point to 'conditioning' of the Arab societies to hate Israel as an easy scapegoat, or eternal outsider in midst of the Arab/Muslim Ummah, the outcome is the same, no real peace will be achieved even if all the land that the Arabs demand are handed over to them.
.
This essentially voids the ideas behind UN 242 and 338, the old "land for peace' formula.
.
Rather than push the idea of land transfer, someone needs to come up with a better vision of what real 'peace' will entail, and what costs should be demanded of the Arab world. For too long, the only arguments have rested on the idea of Arab rights and Israeli responsibilities.
Someone needs to get Marc Lynch & his Abu Aardvark to do some
leg work and get the original articles in the Kuwaiti press that points to the Syrians giving Hizballah the Scuds.
That would explain Khadaffi, Nassrallah, Meshal, Assad, Osama bin-Laden, Ahmadinejad, and a host of others. Mad indeed.
.
Like hatters.
Tabler's ominous warning yesterday that war "might break out," as though wars just come "out of the blue" (as some in Washington actually described 9/11) without human intervention, is no service. If a few Hezbollah Scuds lead to war, it will be because Greater Israel rightwingers insist on using aggression once again to maintain their military domination of the region. Landis has presented a thoughtful set of counter-ideas.
With some overlap, let me quickly review several possible interpretations.
Israeli Lie. One interpretation is of course that Israel made this up to distract Washington from pursuing the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that is now publicly recognized as necessary to save American "blood and treasure." So let's all be careful to avoid such distraction.
Lebanese Defense Move. A second interpretation is that Lebanese are finally obtaining the means of defending themselves. If the West had provided such means to the government, then Hezbollah would have had less justification trying to get them privately. This does not disturb any "balance" because there has been no balance. The devastation of Lebanon during Israel's 2006 invasion showed the terrible absence of balance and the kind of situation that can develop as a result. Perhaps a bit of balance will calm everyone down.
Syrian Plan. A third interpretation accepts that Damascus did it. The most logical expanation for that is frustration. More than a year after Obama entered the White House, it is not clear what anyone has gained from the new conciliatory tone in U.S.-Syrian relations. If anyone knows of any substantive concession yet made by either side, please send me a note. Words matter...but they only go so far, especially in a context where words pour out from all quarters in a steady flood that mixes nice with nasty just the way real floods mix rain with mud.
If Syria in fact gave Scuds to Hezbollah or plans to give them or is trying to create the impression that it intends to give them, then the most obvious interpretation would seem to be that, amazingly, Damascus has figured out...that it is not clear it has gained anything from the new conciliatory tone in U.S.-Syrian relations. This statement rests on the assumption that what Syria really wants is a combination of national security and the return of the Golan Heights. On neither score is it getting anywhere.
Perhaps the enormous prestige of having a U.S. ambassador in residence and the possibility of various economic incentives that might flow from an improved bilateral tone are more important than security and territory, but land and security are normally pretty basic goals. By Occam's Razor, I'm going to stick with that assumption until presented with some persuasive evidence to the contrary. It flows from this logic that Damascus has decided that it needs to signal Washington that its core interests are not being served by a "new tone" in bilateral diplomacy. This isn't a romance; it is an effort to create a military balance in the Levant to replace the current Israeli dominion that sees Israel with not just an overwhelming military edge but also with the political ability to 1) decide what weapons its opponents may possess, 2) attack without being attacked in return, 3) overfly its opponents' territory without penalty, and 4) keep in perpetuity whatever it conquered in 1967.
The Scuds, balanced against Israeli weaponry, aren't much of a strategic military weapon, but they constitute a serious political statement. Washington should be interpreting the Scuds not as a threat but as a message. Lunch on the White House lawn is not Syria's goal; it's goal is redress of grievances.
Smiles, President Obama, are not enough. Smiles won't change the policy of Damascus (or Tehran) on fundamental issues of national security any more than they changed Republican hostility to national health care as a right of all Americans. Smiles may get you through the doorway, but once at the table, it's useful to have something to offer.
National Security William? Right, but whose?
Certainly not Lebanon's. After all, if Syria, or Iran wanted to support their Lebanese brothers, there is a real live Lebanese army sitting around to defend their own country.
.
Indeed, why hand over strategic military weapons to an ethnic NGO militia that answers to a foreign power (Iran) rather than a nation's government. Certainly not one with an agenda that calls for perpetual confrontation with Lebanon's southern neighbor.
.
Moreso, why would Lebanon push for such weapons without attempting to negotiate peac with Israel on its own. After all, there are no serious border disputes. Israel already pulled out of Lebanon's territory to the 'Blue Line' over 10 years ago.
.
Same thing goes for the Syrian question. Why bother to hand over such weapons to Lebanon to protect Syria's interests. Unless of course, its not peace which is what the Dictator in Damascus is trying to achieve.
It is U.S. policy to prevent the "real live Lebanese army" from having the capacity to defend Lebanese national security. This creates a power vacuum that no one can serious expect Hezbollah to resist trying to fill. The U.S. should guarantee - in public words and with sufficient military hardware - the integrity of Lebanon's borders.
Lebonon's Army was ill equioted and under trained on purpose. The reason was that the US & Isreal did want them to be strong enough to repulse any Isreali incursion.
Also the Golan issue is about more then just land. The Golan Heights now supply about 60% of Isreal's water. That was the reason Isreal occupied and annexed them.
By doing so, they hurt the Syrian economy. The water that once went to irrigate Syian grain crops are now used to irrigate Isreali Citrus crops (as well as fill all those pools for the tourists!)
Take a look ath the Golan area on Google Earth and you will see that it is one of the largest reseviors of fresh water in the region. Built by the Syrians. Stolen at gun point by the Isrealis.
Also unlike the smaller rockets used by Hezballah, SCUSS cannot be launched off an old board. SCUDS require large vehicles to prep & launch them. To have them "smuggled" into Lebonon without anyone noticing would be a feat indid!
I feel that the SCUDS are being given to the Lebonese Military to give them some real ablility to deter another Isreali attack.
Wow. Joshua's minders over-reach, get caught, and now Assad's little puppy has to angrily yap yap yap in the street. It is breathtaking how much water a so-called academic will carry for a brutal minority dictatorship oppressing the Syrian people for decades. I hope Allah has a special corner of Hell for sick little errand boys like Landis.
And Camille? You are truly deranged, and perhaps should have a convenient nine-year-old check the maturity of your fawning dreck before posting.
GC
The Middle East Channel offers unique analysis and insights on this diverse and vital region of more than 400 million.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(14)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE