|
| IDF in Lebanon. Decisive influence Photo: Niv Calderon
|
| | | | Menashri. Iranian danger Photo: Michal Rosh Ben-Ami, Tel Aviv University
|
| | | | Rabinovich. 'Syria has becomes secondary' Photo: Israel Hadari
|
| | |
|
|
|
| | |
Experts: Conflict to determine Israel's status in region
Possibilities to open for Israel opposite Palestinians, Arab world depend on way military conflict in Lebanon will end, experts from Tel Aviv University estimate. 'God forbid that Hizbullah should emerge with upper hand. That would be extremely severe for State of Israel,' explains Prof. David Menashri, head of Center for Iranian Studies
Moran Zelikovich
According to a document published Wednesday by the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, "the way this conflict (in Lebanon) ends will have great ramifications for the State of Israel's status in the Middle East."
"Beyond its direct influence on the situation on the Lebanon border, it will have great influence also on Israel's situation and on the possibilities which it will face in the Palestinian arena and opposite the Arab world in general," the document went on to say.
In a seminar titles "The war in the north – the threat opposite Hizbullah and its ramifications," Prof. David Menashri explained that "the struggle in Lebanon is part of a larger war, Israel's war of existence."
"In 1948 there was the War of Independence, which established the State's foundation. Now, it is a war to establish the State of Israel's existence because God forbid that Hizbullah should emerge with the upper hands. That would be extremely severe for the State of Israel," he said.
Menashri, who heads the Center for Iranian Studies at Tel Aviv University, went on to say that "the Islamic Revolution turned the Iranian issue in our region to something significant. It put itself as the leader of the Muslim world. This means an establishment of nuclear weapons and an aspiration to wave a flag over Jerusalem."
He added that the number of casualties of war in the current situation is a "child's game," and clarified that "we do not degrade the victims, but it is a child's game compared to what is expected in case Iran, with its extreme Shiite ideology, possesses nuclear weapons."
Logical combination
According to Prof. Itamar Rabinovich, president of Tel Aviv University, who also spoke in the conference, in recent years there has been a deterioration in Syria's power and influence and it has become a "secondary player" in the Middle East.
Iran, however, has become stronger and has turned into the "leading player" with the key influence in the region, and Hizbullah serves as its wing.
"Because Syria's ability to dictate moves has been extremely reduced, it is not interested in being dragged into a war with Israel," he explained.
"Iran is trying to achieve what Nasser attempted to achieve at the time, and enjoyed, which is great influence in the region, an ability to initiate moves, stand opposite the United States and serve a sort of mediating factor," he said.
A document published by the center explained that Israel was in a complex military conflict that has yet to be seen.
According to the center, Israel should avoid three possible grave scenarios: An early ending of the war with a draw, which would be interpreted as a victory for Hizbullah; sinking into an ongoing attrition war without any clear results; getting carried away by occupying broad areas in Lebanon and controlling them for a long time (the scenario of sinking into the Lebanese mud)
The document added that Israel could emerge from the conflict and guarantee a better security situation on the northern border through a logical combination of the military battles with the diplomatic moves.
"The military moves should serve the desired result and the diplomatic moves that will bring about its achievement also at the price of partially ignoring the needs of the present," the document said.
|
| |
|
| Please wait for the talkbacks to load |
|
|
RSS
