Israel fears that Trump may leave Israel alone to face Iran

From Times of Israel, 14 April 2018:

Though strongly backing US-led airstrikes, Jerusalem also reportedly worried Putin may now supply Assad with advanced air-defense systems, reducing Israel's air supremacy


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and US President Donald Trump in the White House Oval Office, March 5, 2018 (Haim Tzach/GPO)

While Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly backed the US-led airstrikes on Syria in the wake of its use of chemical weapons, Israeli security chiefs made clear on Saturday night that Israel fears the Trump Administration will now consider that its work in Syria is done, and leave Israel alone to face the dangers posed by Iran’s growing military presence in Syria.

Israel’s defense chiefs are also reportedly worried that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, seeing Syria under US-led attack, may provide President Bashar Assad with more advanced air defense systems — which could reduce Israel’s air supremacy in the skies of Syria and Lebanon. A Russian general indicated such an arms supply was possible in comments on Saturday.

Israel’s Channel 10 news reported on Saturday that Israel and the US held numerous discussions ahead of the US-led strike, that Netanyahu’s national security adviser spoke to British and French officials, and that these talks reflected Israel’s profound concern over the Iranian military’s growing involvement and presence in Syria.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior Israeli security source told Israeli media on Saturday night:

“The attack will enable the Americans to say, we’ve done what was necessary, and withdraw from Syria...In such a scenario, “Israel remains alone, facing the threat of Iran establishing itself on the northern border,” the source said.

Syrian government supporters chant slogans against US President Trump during demonstrations following a wave of US, British, and French military strikes to punish President Bashar Assad for suspected chemical attack against civilians, in Damascus, Syria, Saturday, April 14, 2018. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly made clear his aim of withdrawing US forces from Syria as soon as possible. In his speech announcing the air strikes on Friday, Trump stressed: “America does not seek an indefinite presence in Syria under no circumstances. As other nations step up their contributions, we look forward to the day when we can bring our warriors home.”

In further comments underlining Israel’s concerns about finding itself alone on the front line, Trump also said, “No amount of American blood or treasure can produce lasting peace and security in the Middle East. It’s a troubled place. We will try to make it better, but it is a troubled place. The United States will be a partner and a friend, but the fate of the region lies in the hands of its own people.”

Israel is also reportedly worried that Putin may utilize the US-led strike as a pretext to justify making some of its advanced air defense systems available to Assad, Israel’s Hadashot TV reported Saturday night.

The report cited fears in the Israeli security establishment that the airstrike “will give Russia the excuse to ignore Israel’s demands and accelerate the supply to Assad of advanced air defense systems which could impinge upon Israel’s air supremacy.”


This Dec. 11, 2017 photo shows Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Syrian President Bashar Assad watching troops march at the Hemeimeem air base in Syria. (Mikhail Klimentyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)

Earlier Saturday, a Russian general said Moscow may indeed now consider supplying S-300 surface to-air missile systems to Syria and others.

Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoi said Russia had “refused” to supply these systems to Syria, “taking into account the pressing request of some of our Western partners.” But in the wake of the Allied airstrikes, he said, “we consider it possible to return to examination of this issue not only in regard to Syria but to other countries as well.”

Israel has repeatedly urged Putin not to bolster Assad’s air defenses.

The imperative for the Israeli air force to retain its freedom of operation against Syria and Lebanon was underlined last Monday, when Israel allegedly struck the T-4 air base in central Syria where Iran has reportedly been building a fully functional air base of its own and where it has centered its attack drone operations. The base was reportedly protected by surface-to-air missile defense systems among other defenses.

At least seven members of the Iranian military were killed in the strike, and Iran has vowed to hit back at Israel — prompting a heightened alert by the Israeli military in the north of the country.


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu waves part of an Iranian drone downed in Israeli airspace on February 10, 2018, during a speech on the third day of the 54th Munich Security Conference (MSC) held at the Bayerischer Hof hotel, in Munich, southern Germany, on February 18, 2018. (Screen capture)

While refusing to comment on whether it carried out the strike, Israel on Friday revealed for the first time that an Iranian drone dispatched from T-4 in February was an attack drone that carried explosives and was headed to an unspecified location in Israel when it was shot down 30 seconds after entering Israeli airspace....


National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat. (Amos Ben Gerschom/GPO)

...Israel’s National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat spoke on Thursday to his British counterpart, and on Friday to a senior French presidential adviser. According to western diplomats quoted in the report, Israel was at pains to stress that “Iran is the problem” and that strikes on Assad’s chemical weapons facilities, while emphatically necessary, won’t solve it.

Punitive Airstrikes Don't Scratch the Surface

From The New Republic, April 15, 2018, by JONATHAN SPYER:

Don't congratulate the administration on avoiding Russian retaliation. The humanitarian crisis in Syria remains, and the real collision course here is between Israel and Iran.

Despite escalating worries about Russia in past weeks, the skies did not fall as a result of the American-led punitive raid on Syria’s chemical weapons storage and research facilities Saturday morning. Great care was taken to avoid hitting the many sites within “Assad-controlled” Syria which are in fact administered by powers other than the Syrian dictator—namely, Russia and Iran. “A perfectly executed strike,” the president declared on Twitter. “Mission accomplished.” U.S. ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley struck a similar tone of satisfaction. ‘“If the Syrian regime uses this poisonous gas again,” she told an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, “the United States is locked and loaded.”

A great victory, then—depending on whom you ask. Damage was done to Assad, a tyrant responsible for the deaths of an increasingly uncountable number of his own civilians. The careful planning seems to have prevented anything but angry rhetoric from Russia. And the participation of France and the United Kingdom lent at least some air of multilateralism.

But while the tactical prowess of western armed forces over Syrian air defenses was confirmed, it is not quite clear what else has been achieved. Assad will remain in power. The humanitarian crisis persists. And arguably, the focus on checking off proportionate punishment for chemical substances represents a diversion from the issues really at stake in Syria.

U.S. and western officials were keen to note that the operation of recent days did not represent an intervention in the Syrian civil war. A “one-time shot,” Defense Secretary James Mattis called it. It may therefore be assumed that the western stance toward that war remains unchanged. Earlier this month, President Trump declared his intent to  withdraw U.S. troops from Syria, “ideally” within six months. These forces are currently guaranteeing a western-aligned, Kurdish-dominated entity that controls 28 percent of Syria, including the greater part of its gas and oil assets.

If the withdrawal of these forces means that U.S. air power will also no longer be employed to keep Assad, the Iranians and the Russians out of this area, then the region will certainly be reconquered by the regime and its allies. Support for the non-jihadi rebels in the provinces of Deraa and Quneitra, meanwhile, was ended in December, and renewed regime bombardment, despite last year’s “de-escalation zone” truce, began in March. The removal of chlorine from the equation is unlikely to change rebels’ fate.

If U.S. withdrawal proceeds as planned, the Syrian war seems likely to end in strategic triumph for Assad, Iran, and Russia. Western allies, including Israel, are deeply concerned at what is likely to follow from a geopolitical perspective. 

Iran is currently engaged in the construction of an extensive infrastructure in Syria. This includes the establishment of permanent military bases. In addition, the Revolutionary Guards are supporting proxy militia forces on Syrian soil in considerable numbers, and recruiting local “Syrian Hizballah” type forces such as Quwat al-Ridha from the Homs area, al-Ghalibun from the Sayida Zeinab area in Damascus Governorate, and the 313 Brigade from the Deraa area.

Tehran seems to intend to extend this structure to the area immediately east of Quneitra Crossing and the Golan Heights, in order that it may serve as a tool of pressure and potential aggression against Israel. Currently, the enclave controlled by the U.S. and its allies—including the non-Islamist rebel-controlled enclave in Deraa, which birthed the Syrian revolt—blocks Iran’s ability to develop the contiguous land corridor it seeks to extend all the way from the Iraq-Iran border.

U.S. withdrawal of support for these areas, and their subsequent collapse, would mean that Israel would be facing this advance alone—a scenario which has already sparked concern in Israeli media. 

Israeli officials have made clear that the entrenchment of this Iranian project and its extension to the border are utterly unacceptable to Jerusalem. The large-scale raid last week on the T4 base outside Palmyra, in which seven Iranian personnel including a colonel were killed, was an indication of the direction of Israeli policy. As Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman stated following this operation,

“Accepting Iranian entrenchment in Syria would be to accept Iranians putting a chokehold on us. We cannot allow that.”

In other words, although the U.S. and Russia appear to have avoided conflict over Syria, the current strategy seems almost guaranteed to leave Iran and Israel on a collision course. 

When the current western barriers to Iranian advancement are removed, Iran and its allies will finish off the rebel and Kurd forces that remain. Thus consolidated, Iran will then be the dominant actor in a giant land area stretching from the Iraq-Iran border to the Mediterranean Sea and the Syrian border with Israel. Israel will at this point seek Russian assurances to curb a further Iranian advance—which it is unlikely to get. What happens after that is the stuff of strategists’ nightmares.

When seen from this point of view, the destruction of a number of Assad’s chemical weapons research facilities might be seen as at best a diversion from the main point. Not only Syria’s humanitarian nightmare, but also the practical geopolitical problems, remain unchanged.