Several
headlines grabbed my attention these past two weeks. One that stood out
described Syria as descending into an ''inferno as the world begins to
lose interest.''
"The
situation in Syria has descended into a new level of Hell, as the civil
war continues, refugees fleeing the country increase, and the fractured
rebel groups have begun to turn on each other as much as fight the
Assad family regime." ~ John Metzler
The
article cites the "carnage" tally now at over 95,000 Syrian civilians.
The 2013 exodus from Syria averages out at 6,000 per day and is claimed
by the United Nations to be the worst refugee crisis in some twenty
years.
Metzler
is rightly critical of the Obama Administration's "muddled Mideast
policies" and lack of strategic focus. He also notes that the
Administration had given assurances of military aid to the rebels: "the
good guys, we assume, presume and hope."
Trust these guys with guns?
They
would be the same "good guys" who are turning on each other, beheading
Christians and posting the videos of these beheadings on the internet.
These are the same Free Syrian Army "good guys" who, according to
numerous reports, wiped out an entire Christian village.
But
U.N. correspondent Metzler doesn't delve into the Christian massacres.
That would probably open up a large can of snakes exposing the
intolerant Islamist problem; something the United Nations would like to
avoid. He does, however, believe that Syria is "hemorrhaging" and has
undergone irreparable physical and psychological damage.
Metzler
also correctly notes that, regardless of the world at large, the
"outcome of Syria's conflict" is a clear cut Russian interest. In fact,
one pundit sees Russia as heading for a big win in Syria.
Just
in case no one got the memo regarding Russia's desire to re-establish
its presence as a potent economic and military power; it has just
concluded one of the most massive drills in recent memory. The drill
involved: "five Russian armies, the Third Air Force and Air Defense
Command, including strategic aviation, and its navy's Pacific Fleet",
and included: "nearly 160,000 troops, about 1,000 tanks and armored
vehicles, 130 aircraft and 70 warships."
Is Putin serious? You better believe it!
One fly
in the ointment, though, is Israel. Not because of its warring policies
so much as it's selfish policy to maintain its existence. Israel's
possible response to present and future existential threats is bad for
business.
The
Syrian crisis has spilled over to Israel. The influx of Islamic
extremists supporting the Free Syrian Army has compromised border
security and these extremists will eventually turn their focus on
Israel. That is why the Russians offered to place troops in the Golan
recently. That, and Israel's conflict with Iran, is why we can be
certain that Russia will maintain an active presence in the region.
Some
people are still peddling the absurd notion that most of the Middle
East's problems may be resolved if "Israel would just give back the
Palestinian's stolen land."
If
it were only that simple! Yet, the inconvenient facts are that Israel
hasn't stolen Palestinian land and it would be happy to live in peace
with a viable Palestinian State, if that State were to reciprocate by
accepting a Jewish State.
But
not only can Hamas and the Palestinian Authority not agree over the
organizational structure a future State (think Libya, Syria and Egypt),
but both have consistently demonstrated that they won't abide living
alongside a Jewish State.
If
nothing else, the "Syrian inferno" and the Egyptian conflict shows that
many of these people don't mind ripping each other apart in the pursuit
of power or their particular brand of Islamism. That's leaving aside
their horrific treatment of non-Muslims.
So why should Israel trust a Hamas?
Well,
I guess Hamas showed off their touchy-feely soft side when they
expressed sadness at veteran American journalist
Helen-Jews-should-go-back-home-Thomas' passing. As per the Al Quassam
eulogy: "Rest in peace, Helen Thomas. We respect you for taking a
stand."
I suppose that may get her a pass with Allah.
Of
course, the recent extreme rioting in the West Bank is a bit of a
setback for optimistic peaceniks. I think Khaled Abu Toameh gets it
right:
"The
thousands of demonstrators didn't forget to condemn the Palestinian
Authority for "selling out to Jews" instead of seeking Israel's
destruction. Unlike the U.S., Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud
Abbas sees and hears the voices of the extremists at Jerusalem's al-Aqsa
Mosque, in the West Bank, and in the Gaza Strip. This is precisely why
Abbas will never agree to sign a peace deal with Israel: it would turn
him into the biggest traitor in the Palestinian and Islamic world."
(Emphasis mine)
As
it stands, the European Union and the Obama Administration are
drunkenly fixated on forcing a peace deal between two parties. Yet one
of the parties is intent on exterminating the other and has consistently
stated so.
Neither
the E.U. nor the U.S. have been able to prevent Islamists in Syria and
Egypt from killing each other. So what makes them think they can change
the two Palestinian leaderships' mindsets about Israel?
Why would Israel simply shake hands and trust someone who is an avowed enemy, just to please the world? That would be insane.
Does anyone else get a sense of déjà vu?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comment is appreciated and helps me in choosing various subjects for my posts. Thank you. Ce blogger apprécie vos commentaires qui l´aident à choisir de nouveaux thèmes.. Seus comentarios são bemvindos e ajudam este blogger na escolha de uma variedade de temas.