Israel Matzav

Who says an attack on Syria has to help al-Qaeda?

Unfortunately, much of the West sees a US attack on Syria in precisely the zero-sum game terms that this US Naval officer sees it (Hat Tip: Shy Guy via Zero Hedge.com). But it doesn't have to be that way. A reminder from Caroline Glick's Friday column.

It is important to note that despite the moral depravity of the regime's use of chemical weapons, none of America's vital interests is impacted by their use within Syria. Obama's pledge last year to view the use of chemical weapons as a tripwire that would automatically cause the US to intervene militarily in the war in Syria was made without relation to any specific US interest.

But once Obama made his pledge, other US interests became inextricably linked to US retaliation for such a strike. The interests now on the line are America's deterrent power and strategic credibility. If Obama responds in a credible way to Syria's use of chemical weapons, those interests will be advanced. If he does not, US deterrent power will become a laughing stock and US credibility will be destroyed.

Unfortunately, the US doesn't have many options for responding to Assad's use of chemical weapons. If it targets the regime in a serious way, Assad could fall, and al-Qaida would then win the war. Conversely, if the US strike is sufficient to cause strategic harm to the regime's survivability, Iran could order the Syrians or Hezbollah or Hamas, or all of them, to attack Israel. Such an attack would raise the prospect of regional war significantly.

A reasonable response would be for the US to target Syria's ballistic missile sites. And that could happen. Although the US doesn't have to get involved in order to produce such an outcome. Israel could destroy Syria's ballistic missiles without any US involvement while minimizing the risk of a regional conflagration.

There are regime centers and military command and control bases and other strategic sites that it might make sense for the US to target.

It is far from a zero sum game that any US strike on Assad's regime will lead to al-Qaeda gaining control of Syria. And as I noted in a previous post, there are other reasons, only partially connected to Syria, why the US must respond to Syria's use of weapons of mass destruction.

Now, if only Obama could stop disclosing the targets....

Labels: al-Qaeda, Barack Hussein Obama, Bashar al-Assad, chemical weapons, Iranian nuclear threat, Syria

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 1:17 PM