Looking for the lost Wallet
In The News, The Middle East, The UN, War on Terror
A person see his friend crawling on his knees under the light in the street corner and ask him what his he doing, according to old Jewish joke. I lost my wallet, reply the man, in the other street. So why are you looking for it here? Wonder the person. It is dark in the other street reply the man.
The current pressure on Syria’s president Assad reminds me this joke. We are looking to change the Middle East and make it more stable and the easiest place seems to be with the pathetic regime in Syria.
Unlike his father, the current Syrian leader lacks the capabilities to maneuver his country between the world powers. He definitely lacks the ability to position Syria in any leading position in the region. Struggling to find the balance between desires for more western economy and survival as leader although being member of small minority in the Syrian society, it seems like the current regime counting his last days in power.
The current international pressure, led by France and the USA, through the UN investigation of the murder of the late Lebanese Prime Minister Harriri seems to aim on larger target than the murder itself. It seems that the main intention is to replace the current regime in Syria.
This, however, might be even bigger mistake than the invasion to Iraq. The Syrian society is as divided as the Iraqi society and was known for its instability. Adding pressure to the struggling regime might lead to its collapse; however the alternatives aren’t more western or stable.
Collapse of the Syrian regime will lead for one of the two options, or both together: Iranian controlled regime or Sunni fundamentalist regime (via the Islamic brotherhood or directly Al-Quida). Both options aren’t favorable and are more dangerous than the current situation.
Why then are we seeing such efforts to topple Assad’s regime? It is because, like in the old joke, we tend to look for our lost wallet under the street light and not where we lost it. If we accept the assumption that the current situation in the middle-east can change favorably by external intervention the obvious target shouldn’t be Syria it should be Iran. However Iran is more difficult target to deal with.
Iran on the edge of joining the nuclear club, with economical wealth and ideologically drafted society isn’t as easy target as the Syrian stumbling regime. However it is the key to change in the Middle-East.
The Iranian Involvement in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq is a major reason for instability and restlessness. The Iranian funding major terrorist organization and are involve in terror activity. The Iranian interest in Iraq is in direct opposition to the American interest, at least in the way both regimes defining them, and is determining Iranian support for the insurgence activity. The Iranian President latest comments( and alos here and here) aren’t calming the situation as well.
The result of the latest UN efforts in Syria will lead to less stable Middle East. However, whenever the UN activity led to better situation?
No tag for this post.Related posts
Rogel @ January 2, 2006