Israel is in Washington: The moment of the strategic concern from Syria

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

The visit of the Head of the government of the occupation Benjamin Netanyahu to Washington and his meeting with the American President Barack Obama does not differ from its previous ones, it is neither an occasion to coordinate the war efforts which both of them are dreaming of its launching, nor an occasion for the Israeli objection or the American pressure. During eight years each one of them has waged all his military and political illusions and bets, they reached to the admission that they are losing, due to a reason that they cannot accuse each other of, because they face a strategic retreat in the sources of power on one hand, and because they are in front of opponents who are knowing their ability to achieve victories and knowing how to wade their wars on the other hand, and because reading the path of condition in the Middle East since 2000 when Hezbollah has succeeded in obliging the Israeli army to get out of Lebanon humiliatingly will lead to the decline of the American Israeli elements of power  diagram, despite the flashes which it got for short periods as on the first days of the American war on Iraq 2003, and the first days of the Israeli war on Hezbollah in 2006. But at a later stage the developments have occurred to replace the accomplishments with the disappointments. In both cases it is impossible to blame Iran and Syria for what is far from the traditional support for confusing the plans of war, such as the support which can be expected in such wars and causes their targeting surely, moreover it is impossible to blame Russia which was observing in the two wars and avoiding what can affect its relations with America and Israel, but it can be said that the decrease of the necessary sources of power for making victories at the American Israeli side has encouraged the Russians to proceed forward and to anticipate for playing a greater role in the arena of the Middle East which the Americans and the Israelis were monopolizing making the events and drawing the maps in it for a long time.

The aging of America and Israel is more important than to summarize it through the speech about the reasons of failure of the two governments to launch successful wars. The war on Syria has not failed, neither because of the lack of the financial, armament or human resources comparing with the capacities of the Syrian country and its allies, nor out of the lack of political crowd to cover the war, but because America and Israel were unable to bear the bill of blood which the war requires, and which can change the progress of the events in Syria. This war cannot be decisive if it does not lead to the occupation of Syria in the same Iraqi way, and facing a harsher fate than that which the Americans have faced in Iraq, at a cost that is equal times of the cost incurred by the Americans to ensure the success of the occupation and its lasting.

The experience of Turkey with the Kurds as well the experience of Saudi Arabia in Yemen say something similar to the experience of America in Iraq and the experience of Israel at the Southern of Lebanon, which means that the wide alliance which was assigned for the war against Syria is unable to continue the war, and that the using of Al-Qaeda organization with its variations has arrived to the ends with the aggravation of the Islamic extremism in Europe and the flow of the refugees on one hand, and the change which has imposed its accelerating rhythm with the starting of the reverse attack of Syria and its allies since the qualitative Russian positioning in the Syrian war on the other hand. Thus there is no substitute but to go on in the politics and to barter the coverage which America can provide for the war waged by Syria, Russia, and its allies, and then the coverage of the legitimacy of the Syrian country as a result of the end of war, and its financing, opening the commercial roads, reopening the embassies, and lifting the sanctions within costs that related to the interests which the war was unable to achieve.

Netanyahu went to Washington for traditional reasons that related to the arming, coordination, discussing current situations such as the Palestinian Intifada, but originally he went for one new reason;  to say that Washington has sold Iran the nuclear understanding which it wants, without a comprehensive political deal that includes an understanding about the security of Israel, and that Israel has exaggerated in its reaction against the negotiation and the understanding, it bears the responsibility of confusing America, but at the same time it does not want to repeat it once again, in addition that the current negotiation with the Russians and the Iranians after the nuclear understanding and which is related to Syria can be better chance to reach to the real bargains, bargains that Israel neither expects that they contain the recognition of Iran of their presence, nor reconciliations, nor to stop its support of Hezbollah, Israel does not expect as well that the bargain with Syria will be in exchange of the legitimacy of its new regime, and the renewal of the presidency of the Syrian President with an international consensus through a coup in the Syrian policies, but Tel Aviv thinks that the realism allows of developing an offer that is related to a settlement concerning the Golan and the Southern of Lebanon, through which Israel withdraws from the territories which it occupied within a procedure through which the United Nations accompanied with Russian and American troops ensure it,  in exchange of the commitment of not going to launch coming wars, and determining the level of support which Hezbollah got from Syria and Iran but from Syria specifically. As long as Israel does not have the opportunity of preparing for negotiation by military escalation, and it is afraid that it gets out of control, thus the suggestion may be by containing Golan and announcing it a part of the” Israeli sovereignty “as an entrance for this negotiation.

Israel is worried about what is going to be after the victory on the terrorism in Syria, and what is beyond the political solution which will prove its own regional identity, it wants an anticipation that makes it a part of the new map, because it sees the coming war a war of existence, so it wants to achieve it with any cost, as Israel will link the conflict with it with the solution in Syria to solve its crisis, maybe it expects from the others to link their solutions with it with the Palestinian solution. Maybe it is the appropriate Russian moment for engineering the comprehensive peace in the Middle East as some American experts think after their viewing the talks of Netanyahu in Moscow and then in Washington.