Pre-emptive
attacks are an Israeli speciality, but action does not obviously herald
wider international involvement in Syrian crisis
Columns of smoke and
fire light the sky over Damascus, Syria, on Sunday after an alleged
Israeli air strike on at the Jamraya military facility. Photograph: EPA
Syria's crisis always attracts intense international attention when outsiders get involved – especially Israel. Damascus called the latest raid
"a declaration of war" but it was probably intended as something more
limited – to maintain Israel's own security "red lines", irrespective of
the wider picture.
Pre-emptive attacks are an Israeli speciality – from the 1967 assault on Egypt and Syria through the 1981 bombing of Iraq's nuclear reactor to last year's strike on an Iranian-built factory in Sudan supplying weapons to Gaza.
By all accounts, the raids near Damascus at the weekend were intended to stop advanced missiles being delivered to the Lebanese group Hezbollah, which is allied to Syria and backed by Iran. It was only last week that its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, pledged publicly to stand by Bashar al-Assad, along with the president's other "real friends" in Tehran and Moscow.
Syria immediately promised to hit back at a time of its choosing, though it failed to act on a similar threat after an Israeli attack on the same target at Jamraya in January. Israel's assessment is probably that Assad will not respond militarily – if only, as Syrian opposition activists commented sardonically, because he is too busy firing missiles at his own people.
But Damascus did seize the opportunity to claim that Israel was acting in alliance with what Faisal Miqdad, the foreign vice-minister, called "Islamist terrorists" – the official catch all-phrase for all Assad's Syrian enemies. In the same vein, Miqdad told the Guardian recently that "Mossad agents" had been killed in fighting between the rebels and the Syrian army.
In reality, there is no evidence of any such link. The Syrian opposition derides the regime for failing to regain the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967 and entirely peaceful until Assad's grip began to loosen last year. Official propaganda portrays Syria as a stalwart of the "axis of resistance" – along with Iran, Hezbollah and Palestinian militants. The truth is that Assad negotiated directly and pragmatically with Israel for eight years.
The Syrian Opposition Coalition (SOC) said it "holds the Assad regime fully responsible for weakening the Syrian army by exhausting its forces in a losing battle against the Syrian people".
The thinking in Damascus is that emphasising the "jihadi" element in the Syrian opposition – the increasingly strong Jabhat al-Nusra is now formally linked to al-Qaida – has helped to fuel serious doubts in the US and Europe about any kind of outside intervention in Syria, especially arming the rebels.
Thus, amid flurries of anxiety about the use of chemical weapons and debates about the precise meaning of Barack Obama's "red lines," the government pursues its policy on the ground, making military gains while apparently carrying out massacres such as the latest ones in the Banias area, with reports of more than 100 killed by paramilitary fighters.
"It is not unlikely that as a result of these [Israeli] attacks, and world distraction, more crimes will be committed," the SOC said.
Israel's concerns are narrower. By convention, it does not claim responsibility for cross-border attacks, though Binyamin Netanyahu's elliptical reference on Sunday to his duty to "maintain Israel's security" left little room for doubt. Motive, capability and past form all clearly point in its direction.
The action does not obviously herald wider international involvement in the Syrian crisis. Still, Iran accused Israel of acting in collusion with Washington, while an Israeli expert speculated that the medium-range and highly accurate Iranian-manufactured Fateh-110 missiles were targeted in co-ordination with the US to prevent their being used to deliver chemical warheads.
The raid was mounted using the shortest and safest route from Israel, via undefended Lebanese airspace. Another important detail is the apparent use of "bunker-busting" ordnance – possibly the US-supplied joint direct attack munitions or a cruise missile. It will not go unnoticed that these are the kind of weapons the Israelis would need for any future attack on Iran's well-defended nuclear facilities.
Pre-emptive attacks are an Israeli speciality – from the 1967 assault on Egypt and Syria through the 1981 bombing of Iraq's nuclear reactor to last year's strike on an Iranian-built factory in Sudan supplying weapons to Gaza.
By all accounts, the raids near Damascus at the weekend were intended to stop advanced missiles being delivered to the Lebanese group Hezbollah, which is allied to Syria and backed by Iran. It was only last week that its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, pledged publicly to stand by Bashar al-Assad, along with the president's other "real friends" in Tehran and Moscow.
Syria immediately promised to hit back at a time of its choosing, though it failed to act on a similar threat after an Israeli attack on the same target at Jamraya in January. Israel's assessment is probably that Assad will not respond militarily – if only, as Syrian opposition activists commented sardonically, because he is too busy firing missiles at his own people.
But Damascus did seize the opportunity to claim that Israel was acting in alliance with what Faisal Miqdad, the foreign vice-minister, called "Islamist terrorists" – the official catch all-phrase for all Assad's Syrian enemies. In the same vein, Miqdad told the Guardian recently that "Mossad agents" had been killed in fighting between the rebels and the Syrian army.
In reality, there is no evidence of any such link. The Syrian opposition derides the regime for failing to regain the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967 and entirely peaceful until Assad's grip began to loosen last year. Official propaganda portrays Syria as a stalwart of the "axis of resistance" – along with Iran, Hezbollah and Palestinian militants. The truth is that Assad negotiated directly and pragmatically with Israel for eight years.
The Syrian Opposition Coalition (SOC) said it "holds the Assad regime fully responsible for weakening the Syrian army by exhausting its forces in a losing battle against the Syrian people".
The thinking in Damascus is that emphasising the "jihadi" element in the Syrian opposition – the increasingly strong Jabhat al-Nusra is now formally linked to al-Qaida – has helped to fuel serious doubts in the US and Europe about any kind of outside intervention in Syria, especially arming the rebels.
Thus, amid flurries of anxiety about the use of chemical weapons and debates about the precise meaning of Barack Obama's "red lines," the government pursues its policy on the ground, making military gains while apparently carrying out massacres such as the latest ones in the Banias area, with reports of more than 100 killed by paramilitary fighters.
"It is not unlikely that as a result of these [Israeli] attacks, and world distraction, more crimes will be committed," the SOC said.
Israel's concerns are narrower. By convention, it does not claim responsibility for cross-border attacks, though Binyamin Netanyahu's elliptical reference on Sunday to his duty to "maintain Israel's security" left little room for doubt. Motive, capability and past form all clearly point in its direction.
The action does not obviously herald wider international involvement in the Syrian crisis. Still, Iran accused Israel of acting in collusion with Washington, while an Israeli expert speculated that the medium-range and highly accurate Iranian-manufactured Fateh-110 missiles were targeted in co-ordination with the US to prevent their being used to deliver chemical warheads.
The raid was mounted using the shortest and safest route from Israel, via undefended Lebanese airspace. Another important detail is the apparent use of "bunker-busting" ordnance – possibly the US-supplied joint direct attack munitions or a cruise missile. It will not go unnoticed that these are the kind of weapons the Israelis would need for any future attack on Iran's well-defended nuclear facilities.
