The “Israeli” regime today admitted responsibility for an act of war upon the sovereign territory of the Syrian Arab Republic in 2007. While the regime blacked-out media reports at the time, many independent outlets indicated that “Israeli” planes bombed a military site that was under construction in the eastern Syrian city of Deir-ez-Zor. While the regime claims that Syria was building a nuclear reactor, there is no verifiable evidence to support these accusations.
In confirming the attack on Syria in which four F-16s flew illegally into Syria at a low altitude, destroyed the military facility, all the while seemingly passing undetected by Syria, the regime has threatened to do something similar to Iran in 2018.
The problem for the “Israeli” regime is that while its military power has largely plateaued since the early 2000s, Iran and Syria’s military power has grown. In 2007, the Syrian Arab Republic was a domestically peaceful and militarily complacent state, where today, its battle hardened military has been reinforced by new hardware, in spite of its ongoing war against Takfiri terrorism. Where in 2007, four regime F-16s flew into Syrian territory undetected, in February of 2018, Syria shot one such warplane down.
Iran’s military hardware is even more sophisticated and abundant than that controlled by the Syrian Arab Army and furthermore, in order to get to Iran, “Israeli” aggressors would have to fly over two hostile countries, Syria and Iraq.
While the regime continues to target Syria on an ever more frequent basis, Syria’s willingness, ability and success in defending against these attacks is far more apparent than in 2007, when allegedly nothing was seen and done in self-defence against the aggressor.
While “Israel’s” latest threat to conduct a 2007 style attack on Iran is a clear provocation to the Islamic Republic, especially considering the timing of the statement from Tel Aviv, during Iran’s Nowruz new year celebrations, much of the intended effect of the release by the regime, is for domestic consumption.
The reality is that “Israel” has not been able to win a traditional ground war in the 21st century against anyone but the Palestinians of Gaza whose armaments generally range from sticks and stones, to flimsy, crude, short range rockets. All of the regime’s victories against its other neighbours have been in the 20th century. In 2006, “Israel” lost a war to Lebanon in spite of Tel Aviv maintaining that it was a stalemate. In reality, Lebanon’s forces achieved their goal of expelling the last occupiers from their territory while defending the unity of Lebanon and since then, the domestic situation in “Israel” has become even more fragile.
While little reported in the wider world, “Israel’s” forced military conscription for all young men and women is becoming increasingly unpopular. Religious Jews have been protesting for months against the regime’s desire to draft them into the military in a clear violation of their religious freedom. On the other end of the spectrum, many secular men and women have been increasingly vocal about their reservations in respect of living in a military-police state. Even many supporters of Zionism have been openly questioning how long the regime can survive, when its survival is predicated on violently restraining the Palestinian right to self-determination on indigenous Palestinian territory. All the while, regime leader Benjamin Netanyahu is under increased pressure, even by many of his erstwhile loyalists, over large corruption scandals.
Against this background, it is clear that today’s announcement regarding the 2007 attack on Syria is more of a ‘blast from the past’, designed to increase flagging domestic morale than it is a provocation against foreign powers. Ultimately it is both, but the more the regime tries to project its power, especially when relying on events that happened over ten years ago, the more it becomes clear that while still an incredibly powerful military, as a cohesive entity, “Israel” is less strong than it used to be, while other battle hardened powers of the region, including both Syria and Iran are becoming stronger, even while still in the midst of the anti-Takfiri campaign in Syria.
The balance of power is gradually shifting in the Middle East. This is not to say that the “Israeli” regime is weak, it is still a strong nuclear armed power, but it is losing the confidence of its own people, whom it relies on to run a socially integrated military-police apparatus that is required to suppress Palestine.
While Tel Aviv seeks to blame Iran for all of the world’s woes, the reality is that the biggest long term threat to “Israel” is itself. No regime can sustain itself on a permanent war footing forever. Eventually some compromise will have to be made, just as in Apartheid South Africa, a younger white generation became increasingly exasperated with having to live in a country where white privilege had to be enforced by a 24/7 police state. In the case of “Israel”, this is even more apparent as the regime is even more militant than the Apartheid regime in South Africa, while many of the countries in the region who are pro-Palestine, continue to grow stronger militarily.
Thus, today’s statement from Tel Aviv may seem like one from a military dynamo ready to unleash fire and fury on others, but in reality, it comes from a regime whose bark gets louder as its bite becomes less sharp than at any time in the last 35 years.