fbpx

In Syria, both Putin and Obama are a problem for Israel

[additional-authors]
September 29, 2015

Thinking about Russia’s involvement in Syria and its impact on Israel, there are two black boxes that have to be considered: One is the content of the conversation last week between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; the other one is the content of the conversation between Putin and U.S. President Barack Obama this week in New York.

In both cases, the leaders reported that the dialogue was constructive. In both cases, there is no specific agreement that we know about. The U.N. speeches by Putin and Obama clearly demonstrated that the leaders are not of the same mind when it comes to the desired outcome in Syria:

As The New York Times reported: “In what amounted to a basic rebuttal of Mr. Obama, the Russian leader extolled the Syrian leader, saying that he represented stability and that his forces needed support to fight the Islamic State extremists now threatening the region — even though Mr. Assad’s forces are for the most part fighting rebel groups dedicated to his ouster, not the Islamic State militants. ‘We think it’s an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government and its armed forces who are valiantly fighting terrorism face to face,’ Mr. Putin said.”

Putin’s remark that he is “concerned” by Israeli action in Syria demonstrated that the potential for problems vis-à-vis Russia and Israel was not eliminated after the Putin-Netanyahu meeting. As reported in The Jerusalem Post: “Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was concerned with Israel’s Sunday strike on Syria, that was prompted by cross-border fire originating from Syrian army positions. ‘We respect Israel’s interests related to the Syrian civil war but we are concerned about its attacks on Syria,’ Putin said, according to Army Radio. The Syrian projectile exploded in an unpopulated area of the northern Golan Heights, causing no injuries or damage.”

The High Holy Days season has made all reporting from Israel sketchy in recent days, but just before Sukkot, I published an article in Maariv Daily about the new neighbor to Israel’s north — Putin. Surely, Putin and Russia are a new headache for Israel in the region. Operating in Syria when necessary, when Russian forces are also operating within the country, is much more sensitive than it used to be.

Considering Russia’s interests in Syria when devising Israeli policies is also more complicated. If Putin wants Bashar al-Assad to stay and Israel wants him to go — as it has cautiously said in the past that it does — then Israel’s policy is at odds with Russia’s. That is not the first case of the countries’ policies being at odds. But it is still new because of two important factors: First, Russia has forces in Syria — namely, it is demonstrating its willingness to back its policies with force. Second, the U.S. is missing, given its no-action policy. In fact, much more than Putin and his policies, that is the real headache for Israel.

Consider the following: For many years, the policies of Israel and Russia (previously the Soviet Union) in the Middle East were not compatible. The Russians supported Arab countries that went to war against Israel. They maintained relations with Israel’s worst enemies and supplied them with weapons with which to harass Israel. 

But for all those years, Israel had the backing of the United States, and the understanding was pretty clear: Israel is strong enough to deal with its regional enemies, while containing the Russians is the business of the superpower. Just one notable example: In the Yom Kippur War, when the Soviets threatened to intervene, U.S. forces were put on alert — a dramatic event that did not happen frequently because the rules of the game were clear. If Russia intervenes, the U.S. will also intervene.

Israel’s current worry regarding the situation in Syria is therefore clear: It is no longer certain that Washington is ready to play the same role it used to play, to be the restraining power if Russia intensifies its involvement in Syria in ways that are detrimental to Israel. 

What happens, for example, if Russia decides to equip Hezbollah forces that fight alongside Assad with weapons that Israel would not tolerate? In the past, Israel did not hesitate to attack weapons deliveries to Hezbollah. But it will surely hesitate to attack deliveries from Russia.

Would the Russians dare make such deliveries? Once upon a time, they had to consider the potential U.S. response to such moves and the risk of American involvement. Today they might think — for good reason — that the U.S. is not going to be as bold as it used to be in containing their power. 

In Jerusalem, many officials also think that the U.S. is not going to be as bold as it used to be when it comes to containing Russian power. 

Hence the headache. 

Putin’s policy is the root of the problem, but Obama’s policy is what has changed and what makes Putin’s policy so much more complicated for Israel.

If you want to put this in a broader context, the situation goes right back to the debate about the Obama administration and its claim that Israel’s security was not harmed by its policies. 

The Obama team tends to look at the narrow definition of security, and in this narrow sense, it has a valid claim that it has bolstered Israel’s means of security — more equipment, more cooperation on some intelligence matters, more financial support for defined proposes. 

But in the broader sense, Israel’s security has been hit hard by the policies of the current U.S. administration, as recent developments in Syria clearly demonstrate. 

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.