October 6, 2003
No moral base to stand on - Israel and the US
Yesterday Israel launched an attack on a suspected Islamic Jihad base about twent miles outside of of Damascus, Syria (Syria: Israel attacked civilian area, Al Jazeera, 10/06/03). Syria says that it was not a terrorist site and there are some reports that it was a Palestinian refugee area. Syria has called on the UN Security Council to deal with Israel and requested that the US not veto that action. The US essentially said that the Israeli attack was a bad idea. Israel claims a right to attack any time any where that it thinks its safety is at risk. Sound familiar?
The US really can't say anything as Israel is following in the US policy footsteps. That path of preemption and attacks across borders without consulting nations was set by the US after the events of September 11, 2001. Shortly after the US announced its intention to pursue and attack terrorists (and states that support terrorists) any time it chose, with or without UN Security Council input, with or without the agreement of other nations, Israel began a major invasion of Palestinian terrorities. This escalated the current (extended) round of attacks back and forth.
Now Israel has followed the US again by attacking Syria (or at least within Syrian borders). Once again, the US has been there, done that. It is US policy (now). How can we say to Israel anything other than it's a bad idea. Interesting as there is some concern of this escalating violence ain the region, but the US invasion of Iraq is promoted as stabilizing. Maybe if Israel had tried a "regime change" in Syria the US might have been publiclly supportive.
Not unexpectedly, we now hear IDF denies launching air strike on targets (Harel & Ash, Ha'aretz, 10/06/03). The claims counter each other. IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) claims that two vehicles fired at them from the Lebanon side of the border. Lebanon claims that IDF fired on the cars. Either seems equally likely as Israel's attack into Syria is virtually guaranteed to stimiulate retaliation from somebody.
One has to wonder what Israel was really trying to do. Attacking a civilian (or even a military) areas inside another nation is not going to make any friends. It is a move that seems to send all the wrong messages (to me). And it seems fool hardy unless one wants to unify groups against you and escalate attacks against you. Even if the US only wags its finger at Israel, one wonders if even we would be so shortsighted as to launch a preemptive strik on our close neighbors. It is easy to be a unilateral from afar - a different story entirely when you are within arms reach.
An Addendum of Interest
Robert Fisk has a critical article in relationship to this issue, US Gave Israel Greenlight for Attack - Raid on Syria is a Lethal Step Towards War (CounterPunch, 10/06/03). In it he discusses the Syria Accountability Act which has been moving through Congress, that if passed will impose sanctions on Syria for it's support of "terrorism" and occupation of Lebanon.