الجمعة , 16/11/2018

العدد:1884 تاريخ:16/11/2018
Home » Article » Washington between the settlements and the dual engagement -2-

Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S

Washington between the settlements and the dual engagement -2-

سبتمبر 15, 2015 تكبير الخط + | تصغير الخط -

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Saudi Arabia does not have the ability to make an adventure of an open attrition war in Syria without a strategic ally which is Israel that ensures the deterioration of the necessary on one hand, and mitigates any possible American pressures and share them with it on the other hand, Israel knows that the stability of Syria according to the Russian Iranian scenario is deepening the equation of balances where the security of Israel will be face-to-face with the resistance alliance which emerges with all its strength, and which is sure of the reasons of power that were gathered, grown, and aggravated during the wars of the last years. Israel knows in return that the bet on overthrowing Syria has become an impossible dream that surpasses the capacities of the alliance which has wedged the war against it, where Washington was at its forefront, so it has to innovate something that prevents the recovery and the stability of Syria without an involvement in a war that brings disasters to it, and to draw the limits of its military and intelligence intervention within narrow restrictions that do not cause a war, in addition to  the bet on operating forces and countries that do not have this critical situation.

Israel is in front of two options, it tries to merge them together, First, the Turkish Muslim Brotherhood option which promises of cooperation to continue the bet on Al Nusra Front in the war against Syria in return of attracting Hamas Movement for a long-term settlement under the name of a truce, this includes granting Gaza as approved by Israel the name of the final Palestinian country without embarrassing Hamas by announcing the abandonment of the Palestinian rights, just to say that it is a truce where the actions of the resistance are stopped for twenty five years. Second, the Saudi option which puts the priority of the confrontation against Iran, and sees that Syria and Lebanon are their direct arenas, it looks forward to a partnership with Israel asking for a coverage for this strategic alliance through a dramatic settlement that suggests putting the Palestinian issue on the process of resolving through a promise of a Palestinian country in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, so the beginning will be in Gaza with a kind of a civilian administration in the West Bank, provided that Hamas will be prevented from having the reign over Gaza but making it within an international regional partnership represented by the two teams of the Palestinian rule in Ramallah and Gaza, which will grant it in return the power of legitimacy, this will open the door for an infinite long negotiated solution that justifies the Gulf Israeli partnership in the confrontation against Iran.

The question which confronts Europe is how to stop the tampering into the Syrian issue, in a way that prevents it from being an arena of the negative reception of the consequences of the war, its crises, and its outputs especially regarding the issues of the immigrants and terrorism. The condemned voices started to expand from Spain, Austria, down to Britain, and soon Germany, Italy, and Greece. The European concept of security stems from the approaching of war to a dead end in achieving the goal of the comprehensive change, so this makes the war of attrition an attrition for Europe itself,  it calls the Europeans to accelerate in forming a political solution for Syria, that justifies the engagement with the Syrian country in normal relations and a serious cooperation to solve the issues of the immigrants and the terrorism, so this meets the Russian and the Iranian visions, it avows for the admission that there is no plausible hope without a pivotal role of the President Bashar Al-Assad, despite the strongest concept of the Spanish and the Austrian positions which went further than the British position in the call for openness and cooperation with the President Al-Assad as a symbol of the Syrian country, but the British position has replied to a practical question that is related to the mechanism of the political solution, which remained inactive during the absence of a unified Russian American interpretation of the Statement of Geneva 2012 about the transitional phase, till the British announced the approach of the Russian interpretation which is based on accomplishing this phase under the presidency of the President Al-Assad and through the constitutional institutions, in addition to the abandonment of the coup form which the Americans and the British have promoted together, which tried to borrow the Iraqi example under the American occupation and applies it on Syria under Chapter VII by deactivating the work under the Syrian constitution and taking over the control of the authority to the ruling body that resembles the one which Paul Bremer has assigned for Iraq after occupying it. Today the opposition parties are clapping for such an option and consider it their opportunity to rule without going through the ballot boxes. The question here is: Is it possible for this European transition in general and this British transition in particular to be under the American eye without its consent?

Washington is confused and bewildered of this strategic vacancy, it sees, observes, and waits and maybe it will spend months in this state till the Turkish results become clear as well as the Saudi Russian and Iranian tests. The European obsessions show clear reactions of these options, in order  to determine its strategy between the engagement into a political solution according to the Spanish receipt and on the basis of the British position, or the engagement in the Saudi Israeli option even from under the table by encouraging, supporting and covering, or whether the theories-makers will innovate a third option, it is the dual engagement that is inspired from the dual containment, it is based on the engagement here or there, a political solution with Syria and Al-Assad and an attrition war against the Saudi and the Israeli, furthermore, considering the cost which the Syrian country must pay to have the full and the final cooperation is to have the mission of getting rid of the groups of Al-Qaeda Organization who are present in Syria and who will bring two risks to it without paying attention, the possibility of sliding into the regional war and the threat of the expansion of the effectiveness of terrorism which is fed from tempting its elements to the battlefields  instead of the illusion of termination which some believe in, according to the European facts which state that the estimation of the French security of  the active members in it for the interest of Al-Qaeda before the Syrian crisis is three hundred while today is eight thousands members, it is expected that if the war continues for five years, then the number will be up to fifty thousands.

Washington between the settlements and the dual engagement -2- Reviewed by on . Written by Nasser Kandil, Saudi Arabia does not have the ability to make an adventure of an open attrition war in Syria without a strategic ally which is Israel Written by Nasser Kandil, Saudi Arabia does not have the ability to make an adventure of an open attrition war in Syria without a strategic ally which is Israel Rating:
scroll to top