That Land is Mine too
At present, no Middle East country challenges Israel's military might. In fact, Middle Eastern countries pose almost no serious threat. They cannot fight in a conventional manner, which helps explain in large part why terrorism is the preferred method to deliver the most expressive statements. But enemies of Israel frequently make trouble. They set off bombs and improvised explosive devices and once in a while, create the appearance of a credible threat. Understandably, they would rather target the US and US citizens going about their business than Israelis, who have learned and perfected suitable responses. Lately, they hit Syria twice, both times accomplishing needful tasks, primarily insofar as arms shipments are concerned. What Israel's enemies hoped to achieve with them is immaterial. They should not have deadly weapons even if they have not yet mastered their use. To be sure, they did poorly trying to hold onto them. Still, it is enough that they chant anti-American and anti-Israeli slogans, indicating by elision what they might do if only they could. The Civil War in Syria is a good example of how Middle Eastern countries are inventing new, circuitous ways to attack a common enemy. At the moment, they are sharpening their hatred and learning the craft of guerrilla warfare. Sooner or later, all animosities will unite and come to focus synergistically on the Middle Eastern showcase for American-influenced democracy.
This is a difficult situation. There is no overestimating its significance, either now or later. Perhaps it is best to simply gain perspective. Peace talks will continue despite the latest handful of semi-surgical actions. They are not particularly neighborly, but the effect in the long run is good. The current policy of blanket appeasement or delicate, two-sided diplomacy back here in the Great Satan has been tried before. It might work or, conversely, might not, allowing the enemy time to prepare another spectacular attack. Or both. There is no such thing as tough circumstances without an element of chance. Syria's meltdown is interesting, however, and that is, to an extent, the basic motivation for this hub. Complaints against Russia for destabilizing come, understandably, from the West. This aspect of the whole quagmire is probably best left for the experts. Russia is providing arms, but again, these have not dramatically impacted the Israeli-Syrian question. After all, as mentioned above, Syrians, for al-Assad or not, do not seem fully capable of mobilizing. In other words, though there is talk of chemical weapons and intolerable chaos, the problem is loosely contained. At least to the sense and sensibility of an amateur observer.
Sometimes inactivity or lack of direction or pure waiting is the better strategy. Confusion reigns. The Middle East is in terrible turmoil. But the end of this part of the end-times is far from over. Not every contemporary big-name player has exhausted his or her resources. Moreover, a lot of talent is still in the wings, yet to take center stage. An aggressive defense of the Israeli homeland seems preferable. Larger territory, if it comes about, will provide a more livable map for future, peace-loving inhabitants. The current fad of angelicizing oneself and demonizing the other has run its course. It is heartwarming to cheer the home team, but by now, everybody is out of line. It is a bad situation and nobody wears a halo. But human beings, unlike angels, must prioritize their own concerns over those of strangers. Self-interest is, regrettably, the ticket, independent of abstract rights and wrongs, and mercurial public opinion. The more major point is that later the configuration of Middle Eastern politics is bound to change for the worse. At least today, an opportunity lurks to acquire more terrain, if one will entertain for the sake of argument a rather unpopular notion. Space is not being freely offered, however, so it has to be forcefully taken -- hardly a winning proposal if the governing mindset is to make use of force only if one's back is to the wall.
War is constant in this land to the east of the Mediterranean Sea. The question is, how should it play itself out? It seems apparent that Israel and her neighbors cannot get along with one another. Peace according to Merriam Webster is an unrealistic goal. Instead, an arrangement has to be found in which hostilities are kept to a bare minimum. Israel's enemies are likely to chant and rally and lob the occasional rocket regardless of where Israel's boundaries are, pre- or post-1967. Therefore, why should Israel not add real estate to gain greater security, create buffer zones, and defuse restive settlements? The answer is speculative. Israeli's PM will no doubt mull it over. Ultimately, he will decide what is in Israel's best interests, to act against Syria before Iran, vice versa, or stand down.