The Mideastwire Blog

Excerpts from the Arab and Iranian Media & Analysis of US Policy in the Region

Can it now be said that the S. syrian and s. lebanon fronts are one.. and a new strategic picture for Israel emerges?

I would generally agree with this part from Ibrahim’s piece translated in akhbar english:

http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/israel-should-not-ignore-its-northern-border

“…Based on this logic, it is better for the enemy, and those who might be concerned, to start acting on the basis that Israel will be facing, day-by-day, a bigger problem on its northern border. While it is true that Syria and the Resistance are not interested in war, it would be wrong to assume that they do not have the strength to fight.

The huge mistake that was made by Israel’s allies in the West and the region led to the removal of all obstacles facing the unity of the Syrian and Lebanese fronts confronting it.”

— This is a major development, a long time in the coming, and one which adds a particularly valuable sphere of action for Hizbullah. For it can no longer be said with great certainty that an operation in the golan or adjacent areas is Hizbullah’s work. The limited rocket strike from the south were generally taken as such, but now Hizbullah FINALLY has a deep and advantageous space to inflict pain on Israel with a degree of plausible deniability/confusion etc which matters for multiple constituencies.

— And yes Ibrahim is correct that – just like Israel in many ways birthed Hizbullah itself with its 1982 invasion – so to has it birthed a new, open front which adds multiple complexities and contingencies to its strategic picture. That said, still, go back one step further, and it could be said equally that Hizbullah caused the Israelis to move into this position because of the likely transfer of weapons, whose rate has likely been growing exponentially since 2012.

Advertisements

Written by nickbiddlenoe

March 21, 2014 at 5:04 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

%d bloggers like this: