"The Real Next War"?
Such loose talk about war...
Has Thomas Friedman EVER met a war he didn't like -- and cheer-lead for -- in the Middle East?
30
The saving grace is your amazing inability to understand what is happening in that part of the world. Every time you have dinner with some retired person in Israel you end up thinking that you've figured it all out.
26
I would imagine that at a time like this Israel is grateful to have a leader like Netanyahu instead of some indecisive wimp.
9
Tom doesn't really address the real no-joke bottom line that is always facing us: Iran's stated goal is nothing less than the utter destruction of Israel.
Out-n-out, unapologetic genocide of the Jewish people. Full stop.
That's what we're up against, and that's why Iran is in Syria, as it is in the other Muslim capitals.
When the Ayatollah says 'Within 25 years!' or when Iran holds its regular Holocaust denial cartoon contest or when Iran tests another ballistic missile, we know exactly who the message is for, and we are preparing ourselves accordingly.
We here in Israel are not deluding ourselves about Iran, and neither should any of you.
32
Friedman has some serious chutzpah.
The current NYT columnists who were cheerleaders for the Iraq War were Brooks, Stephens and Friedman - they have never repented their support for that war - the greater foreign policy disaster for America since Vietnam War. Almost 5000 American soldiers dead, tens of thousands wounded physically and mentally - directly leading to thousands of subsequent suicides, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed, millions made refugees, the carnage and terror continues to this day 15 years later, ISIS created (from no presence of Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to 2003 Iraq War disaster), Iran no longer checked by Saddam Hussein (the devil, and he really was a devil, that we knew) becoming the regional power and threat it is today. Baghdad is under Iran’s influence directly because of the war Netanyahu and Friedman cheerled. It’s long overdue for Israel to actually use its military might (paid for with $4 billion/year of US tax dollars to a country with higher GDP per capita than Italy, France, Japan) against the theocratic thugs who run Iran and threaten all Sunni nations (including US/Israel ally Saudi Arabia, that spreads its ideological poison Wahhabism, that is foundation for Al Qaeda and ISIS) and Israel and the region. Let’s hope Israel performs better than their cowardly performance against Hezbollah (40,000 Israeli ground troops would not take on 1000 Hezbollah fighters) in 2006. Just bombing from air does not work - show some courage Israel.
15
I would not blame Israel for utterly destroying every Iranian installation in Syria. In fact, I expect it. So many liberals (I'm one) are so quick to reflexively blame Israel for the situation in its neighborhood. But unless you've been there, unless you have family there, as I do, and unless you take a very close look at the map and see a country whose "waist" is 8 miles wide -- 8 miles! -- your criticism discounts the reality that Iran, Syria, and its terrorist proxy Hezbollah, not to mention Hamas, will not stop until the country is destroyed and all its Jews are killed.
20
First of all, the perspective from which you view the situation (the Golan Heights) is a violation of international law, and has been condemned as such on multiple occasions by the U.N. Secondly, reason perhaps invites the conclusion that the Syrians retained some chemical weapons for possible defense against the equally violate actions against Iraq and Libya; albeit that is not necessarily so, as it may indeed have been ISIS which perpetrated the alleged action in Douma. Thirdly, the Iranian fortification in Syria is a reinforcement of the idea of preventing the possibility of the negating of a rear-guard action from there in case of an invasion of Iran by one of these colonial coalitions. Fourthly, the Zionists repeatedly attack Syrian efforts to repel the former's illegal occupation of their territory. They repeatedly launch air attacks on places where they have no legal right to do so. They are international outlaws. What else could Iran do to defend itself in the face of on-going destabilization and aggression? It is not Iran which is imperialistic, it is the American-backed Zionists who are interested in hegemony in an area where they are an illegal and immoral presence. It is not wise, I think, to deal so much with personalities, as I think you will find unanimity among the foes of the Zionists in resisting their desires to conquer.
22
usual neo-lib nonsense from friedman, the guy who assured us that iraq had WMD and the US would install a democratic government in iraq. israel has been involved in military adventures in iran for decades, including the murders of iranian scientists.
and of course iran is interested in having a military defense system against israel. israel, which is certainly involved in the current syrian warfare, has been pushing the US to attack iran for years.
25
I suggest Friedman read not the Torah which I'm pretty sure he doesn't but read the Quran and hadith the parts talking about how infidels must be dealt with. If Eurabia had read above then it might stlll be called Europe.
7
Funny we don't hear a greater discussion of Mr Friedman's crush, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. That fella is just itching to fight the Iranians openly, not in proxy. And he wouldn't mind doing it along side his new best friend, Israel.
21
It is Persian Gulf Mr. Friedman,not "Gulf".Time for you to
take a geography lesson and learn the correct name for this
body of water.
13
"Fasten your seatbelt."
This is the kind of glib analysis which belongs to Fox/MSNBC, not in the Times. Readers here expect a bit more detailed reporting and commentary. Not just from "a forward observation post" on the Golan (which any tourist can visit), but on the ground both inside Syria and Israel.
Anyway, lost in Friedman's superficial piece is the fact that Iran does have "air cover." it has hundreds of thousands of Hezbollah missiles smuggled in from Iran and ready to be launched into Israeli schools, kindergartens, hospitals, residential centers, nursing homes and shopping malls.
The Left, including Mr. Friedman, will blame loss of life in the next conflict on Israel. The Times already blamed Israel this week for Hamas-led "peaceful protester" deaths on Israeli fire. As if Hamas protesters were merely requesting the enforcement of some zoning law or advocating for better schools.
Back in the world of reality, Iran is seriously hoping to "liberate all of Palestine" by fire and blood, to hastent he coming of the hidden Mahdi.
But Mr. Friedman and the Times can sit back, toast some popcorn, and "fasten their seatbelts."
Erudite, purely first rate analysis.
9
Gee, with the threat of all hell breaking loose between Israel and Iran which will, there can be little doubt, drag the US fully into war to support Israel, you'd think somebody would be talking with somebody to avoid it. No, instead we have Trump creating chaos with Qatar for personal reasons with or without the Saudi's encouragement, and John Bolton salivating away the next few weeks at which time he gets to crush the Iran Nuclear Deal and sound the drum beats.
It's all so transparently contrived. Is Iran suicidal? I think not. Does the US and Israel and the Saudi coalition want to wipe Iran off the map? Absolutely.
18
I think that Saudi, Israel and the US want to break the spinal cord of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, but not the Iranian Military. The goal is not to dismember or devastate Iran itself, but defang it and make sure that it can't continue to stir up trouble in the ME (which is what Iran has been doing for the past 40 years). Obviously, its nuclear program and long-range missile program cannot be allowed to come to fruition, and its proclivity to support Shia rebel groups in Sunni countries also needs to be curtailed.
7
>
The question that reporters should be asking U.S. Admirals is how will the U.S. Navy be able to defend its ships against Russian and Iranian supersonic Sunburn anti-ship missiles.
The USS Stark was almost spilt in two by a subsonic exocet missile, the Sunburn is a supersonic missile.
If we get in a dust up with Iran or Russia, we're no longer fighting guerrillas and idiots driving pickups.
Our Navy has NEVER had to defend itself in battle against supersonic anti-ship missiles. Russia has the best in the world; instead of building big carriers, they invested in cheap anti-ship missiles, and they can swam the fleet with them.
If you remember the movie sink the Bismarck when the the HMS Hood, England's biggest battleship at the time, was disintegrated by one shell, whereby the watching English admiralty filled their pants.
Just Imagine the boys and girls on Fox reporting out that the Nimitz was sunk, very possible.
Read and learn:
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/washington/12navy.html
http://www.rense.com/general59/thesunburniransawesome.htm
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/moskit.htm
6
Why would Russia attack our ships? We live in the time of ICMBs. Attack our ships directly would be akin to starting the end of the world. In WWI you would attack a battleship, not today
1
From all accounts, General Soleimani is evil incarnate and reflects all of the bad things that the Iranian establishment embodies. He has wreaked havoc from Iran to the Mediterranean and as the article says has been directing his martial efforts recently in Syria to some success. But as the writer states, common knowledge in the media about Iran describes the young and disaffected wondering why so much of their treasure is being spent on useless wars in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq to prop up the murderous Al-Assad regime, Hezbollah and Palestine, with screams of "Not Palestine nor Syria, but Iran" a rallying cry for the large protests in January. There is still the risk that as more dead IRGC fighters return home the disaffection will boil up. Certainly in western circles this man has a large target on his back so he can count on sure martyrdom, but his just desserts most certainly will be in Hell not Heaven. The West must do more to support our steadfast ally and only true friend in the M.E. Israel, the only stable and productive government in the region.
7
Who cares?
Let the Russians, Turks, Syrians, Kurds, Iranians and Israelis figure it out.
Obama had enough sense to stay out if that mess.
Trump and Netanyahu are both despicable humans.
25
Israel is the cause of all unrest in the Middle East, with the U.S. as its lapdog. Sorry, but true.
24
You're absolutely correct - the Israelis invented the Sunni-Shia fault line 1400 years ago - always those pesky Jews!
15
Gotta laugh. Internicine Arab warfare isn't because of Israel at least to everyone but you.
17
Ahh, so the Kurds fighting with the Turks; the Shiites with the Sunnis; Muslim Brotherhood v Secular Egyptians; all the fault of the Jews!!!
Wow!!
Dennis, you finally figured it all out!
(I need to go to my local "Elders of Zion" club now, will comment on that later)
7
Iran's goal is the same as it ever was: Destroy any nation that disagrees with its beliefs about a 7th century tribal witch doctor who heard voices in his head.
Friedman cannot "independently verify that claim"? Who cares! Friedman isn't an Israeli, doesn't live there threatened by heavily-armed aggressive nations whose sole goal is to "wipe Israel off the map". Ignoring the clear and present danger to Israel would be stupid. The Iranians, the Egyptians, the Saudis, the Iraqis, the Syrians, and the Arabs living in Gaza and the West Bank have made it excruciatingly clear that they all want Israel erased from existence. Apparently Mr Friedman didn't get that memo, all the ten thousand times it has been delivered.
14
Correct, he enjoys life of Riley thousands of miles away. That's what he's all about.
4
Israel < World War III
Who cares what Israel does/thinks about ANYTHING?
Israel has every right to exist, but the US is under ZERO obligation to pay for it.
If Russia nukes Israel, good bye Israel.
Most very sincerely,
Louis Anthes
13
These guys want to kill each other. Who are we to stop them?
Let them be. No intervention. No help. Not to Israel, not to the other side (who seems to be less clear who are they by the minute).
They want to be aggressive? Let them carry the full burden.
Oil?
Don't need it anymore. That's the only reason ",America" cares. (Well, that and the lunatics that think this is some sort of biblical process that lands them in eternal life)
10
Meanwhile, in the US, we have schools in disrepair with out-of-date , tattered school books and 4 day school weeks; cities with polluted water systems; failing bridges; millions without healthcare and living in poverty; a gross lack of affordable housing and a homeless crisis; an opioid epidemic; and out-of-control gun violence and all of that is just for starters. Israel is an extreme right wing, apartheid state. Saudi Arabia is a brutal medieval kingdom. Iran is a brutal medieval religious dictatorship. Assad's Syria is a brutal secular dictatorship. Afghanistan is a gang war.I feel very sorry for the many good people trapped in these situations, but we should end all US military involvement in these swamps and quicksands immediately (and quit publishing columns that seem almost excited about the prospect of more war and instead focus on the problems here and consider China, the West's real enemy, which is laughing at this waste of blood and treasure while it forges ahead with AI research and massive deployment of soft power).
16
Wouldn't you just love Israel if it was an ultra-leftist state instead among all those brutal dictators ?
1
Well said Mike 1968. China built High speed rail between Beijing and Shanghai , and we can't even get it working between NYC and DC. We will be a third world soon. Instead of wasting our money there, spend it here. And defend against china
6
Where did the money to pay for Iran's military excursions come from? Courtesy of Barack Obama.
6
Mr. Friedman:
Something is seriously wrong here. In this article, you neglect to blame Israel for climate change, the Russian invasion, sunspots, and every other blight affecting humanity. Go back and recheck your research. I’m sure that you can find SOME way to pin the blame for the chaos in the Middle East on Israel.
13
At the risk of losing his job? Never
4
It `s so exciting. The neoconservatives are winning in America and we will finally get the world war we have all been waiting for. Just like when we were children watching cowboys shooting "indians" at the Saturday flicks. The Israeli forces are the goodies and are bound to win the ashes - as they say in anglosaxon cricket. It `s so exciting -one can hardly wait.
7
As a supporter of Israel's right to exist, I've wondered what if the unspeakable happens and the Islamic world achieved it's goal (and frankly the goal of many Europeans) of Israel's extermination? Would peace then come to the Middle East? We know the answer.
8
It seems to me we could make the world a lot safer if the U.S. just announced that we are no longer in the business of "Nation building" or "regime changing".
"We will protect our interests and those of our allies, but we no longer feel it necessary to threaten other world leaders whom we don't like or agree with."
With that statement small regional conflicts might just stay small regional conflicts.
Iran is not going away, neither is Israel. It seems everybody in the area is fine with Assad, since they know his habits.
Perhaps Israel could get into the business of desalinating and selling drinking water to the region thereby making itself indispensable to her neighbors.
6
The single largest reason that Iran and the theocratic thugs who run the country are as big a regional threat as they are today is the unmitigated disaster of the Iraq War - almost 5000 American soldiers killed, tens of thousands physically and mentally wounded - thousands committing suicide as a direct result, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians killed, millions injured, millions made refugees, innocents still being killed 15 years later, ISIS created (when there was no presence of Al Qaeda or affiliated or offshoot groups in Iraq prior to 2003 Iraq War), a preemptive war of choice to make oil companies, military industrial complex, white Evangelicals, right-wing Israelis like Bibi happy, started under false pretext and lies, distracting us from the necessary war against Al Qaeda and Bin Laden in Afghanistan at the time. One of the greatest cheerleaders for the Iraq War was Friedman - he has never said mea culpa.
8
Israel is the only country in the world where "1 nuclear bomb" would wipe it out. And because of this it will eventually do "anything and everything" to survive. Hope the mullahs of iran understand...
6
I’m not sure I would worry so much about Israel. They have the strongest army in the region and with the backing of America, those who are foolish will find themselves getting more than they wished for. Israel will never forget the holocaust nor let it ever happen again. They will never allow evil regimes like Iran and Syria and putania to wipe them out. Why is it humans have such bloodlust. That seems to be the calculation no one can solve. When I meet the devil, he will be wrapped in a flag and carry a holy book.
2
And thanks to Obama's fecklessness, naivete, and desire for a "legacy" deal with Iran, regardless of the reality, he handed Iran $150 billion dollars in cash secreted to them on pallets. As an Iranian resister asked recently, what schools or hospitals did the mullahs build with this money courtesy of Obama and Kerry?
4
I used to read Friedman's columns and books avidly, but then he began supporting the invasion of Iraq because he thought it would ensure Israel's security.
He's be a great journalist for The Forward, Commentary, the Jerusalem Post, et al., but he's clearly learned nothing from his past mistakes and has become Captain Obvious in his reporting from the illegally occupied Golan heights.
He tells us Syria is about to explode and that Iran and Israel will soon be at war. In these matters, he is expressing his hopes, not his fears.
14
"SYRIA-ISRAEL BORDER, Golan Heights — " Sorry Mr. Friedman, but I couldn't read beyond your column's erroneous dateline. Calling the border between Israeli-occupied-Syria (the Golan Heights) and the rest of Syria, the "Syria-Israel Border" is totally incorrect, and worse, reflects a bias that surely permeates the rest of your article.
Every country in the world (except Israel) believes that the Golan Heights is Syrian territory. Israel de facto unilaterally and illegally annexed the territory in 1981. To omit these facts and replace them with the content of your dateline is to live in a dangerous alternate reality. Consider this: would you call the border between Crimea and the rest of Ukraine the Russian-Ukrainian Border? The answer is that you shouldn't. To do so would be an implicit endorsement of Russia's expansionist agenda. That is something you might encounter in a state-funded propaganda outlet like RT but should not expect in the NYTimes.
As for the content of your article, I'm sure you argue that the Iranians are nefarious and imperial - a danger to Israel and by extension to the United States and the whole world. Maybe Iran is imperial. But the US is The Empire of our times, and Israel - which has annexed the Golan, is continuing to annex the Palestinian territories, routinely violates the sovereignty of its neighbors with airstrikes, and already possesses nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles - is no doubt an empire of sorts too.
14
What are you talking about? The UN carved up seven mideast Arab states back then and one home for the Jewish people only to reduce same home for Jews by over 70% in order to assuage Arabs.
2
Sorry Tom.. we are all well aware of the fact that its Israel and its friend Saudi Arabia who have been trying their level best to wreck the US and EU efforts at peacefully co-existing with Iran with regards to its Nuclear program. In fact not a single UN report has found Iran to be violating its part of the commitment.
We equally recognize the hard efforts of Prince Charming Salman (shall we say Prince of Wahhabis/Al Qaeda/ISIS factions) who has been working very hard and aggressively so as to to push Iran to the brink.
After 3 years of incessant lobbying, pressuring of US officials including an insult ridden speech in the US congress aimed at president Obama it seems their efforts are finally close to coming to bearing fruit and dragging US in yet another middle east war based on false allegations in abeyance to the pro Israeli lobby.
In a crazy US president who has been intent to wreck havoc on climate change and lacks the intelligence and depth to understand foreign affairs they have found a perfect ally.
However these myopic leaders seem to have forgotten history lessons from just a few years back in that wars can be started at will but cannot be stopped at will, and that this time its not Iraq.
Oh yeah.. Its close to 20 years.. whatever happened to finding justice for 9/11 victims suffered at the hands of Wahhabis.. oh yeah we destroyed Iraq for that.. hmm .. or maybe Its Israel which is always more important.
10
It's way past time for Israel to destroy Iran's military capability. The Iranian leaders are terrorists who must be stopped before they destroy Israel.
6
Several commenters have pointed out that Iranian parents would be reluctant to send their sons to fight and die in an expanded conflict between Iran and Israel in Syria.
However, it's important to emphasize that the majority of "Iranian" soldiers in Syria are Hazara refugees from Afghanistan - some as young as 14. (Hazara refugees in Iran are second-class citizens, often humiliated and discriminated against.) The choice is usually sign up or risk deportation. This would continue to be the case if the conflict between Israel and Iran in Syria were to expand. https://theintercept.com/2017/10/25/syria-iran-afghan-refugees/ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/opinion/sunday/iran-afghanistan-refug...
4
I sincerely hope that Mr. Friedman is wrong. If Israel and Iran go to war over Syria, Hezbollah will attack Israel from Lebanon. It is possible another front would open up between Jordan and Syria. It would be very difficult to contain. The Saudi's may want to take a stand, not for Israel but against Iran. A lot of innocent life will be loss on all sides. I hope smart leadership prevails and can figure out a way to deescalate the situation.
5
It will be a nuclear war real fast. If it is a long conventional war, Iran is in trouble with all Sunni Nations on the side of Israel. Saudi's will see a real chance of suppressing Sunnis once and for all. And Russia is making too much noise with nothing to back it. Putin played history and rebuilt a broken Russia and totally understands that if it involved in the war too actively, it will be horrible economically for Russia and the high oil prices may not come to the rescue this time around.
2
I have to disagree with Friedman again. I think he is allowing his judgment to be colluded jet setting with the rich Saudi dictators, that he calls reformers and sipping tea with the Israeli generals without seeing the world from the other side. That's the difference between just another opinion and a great informative opinion.
Has Iran overplayed its hands? It's hard to know. For sure Iran is stretched thin. But, it's only considered overplaying if Iran has a choice. I think seeing it from the Iranian side (which would be a novel strategic way of analyzing things) they probably have no choice but to dig themselves deep inside Syria. The Iranian fear is actually far more serious and real than the Israelis (if you look around the policy of regime change around that region).
So if Syria's fragile control falls, Iran fears it will be next. The Israeli lobby (now emboldened with Bolton in the White House), will push the MEK faction and will fund and send Arab Islamist fighters into Iran, while Israelis might simultaneously conduct surgical strikes with impunity.
Since Iran needs Syria as a retaliation corridor, against Israel.
This is why Syria is key for Iran. Israelis know this well, they know Iran will never use Syria to preemptively attack Israel (just remember how they restrained Hezbollah's respond to Israel). However, they know if they want to create civil war in Iran or have the option to bomb Iran at will, they need chaos in a Syria without Iran.
9
You got it the other way around. What's Iran doing in Syria? It's Israel that's defending its border against Iran military build up sworn to destroy Israel.
3
If Putin does not have stomach for a direct confrontation with the US over Iran in Syria, he will have to keep out his forces and shut down its anti missile systems during the looming Israel Iran fight in Syria. For this the minimum he expects is to be given assurance that Assad will stay. If Putin takes the Iranian side he will be seen as an additional Iranian proxy.
Iran has done much to thwart and defeat Isis and other radical Wahabist groups who sewed brutal, violent chaos in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere. Israel has shown no similar inclination, in fact cozying up to Wahabi Saudi Arabia. The United States should engage with its natural ally Iran and oblige its client Israel to pursue peaceful coexistence rather than supremacy.
9
If so, let this be Israel's war, not ours. Iran is not a threat to the US, and it is time to instead build bridges. Israel has successfully leveraged its lobbies to use American blood and treasure for the "creative destruction" of its neighborhood, as the neocons put it. Israel is now plenty powerful on its own, and it is time for it to make its own tough decisions, moral and military.
14
And while we're considering this mess left us by the Obama Administration, can we also consider that a drone could just as easily have been carrying a dirty bomb, built from the nuclear material that Iran has no doubt hidden away? Or which was just plain left on those military bases we're not allowed to inspect in the Iran nuclear deal? And the mischief no doubt funded by that two billion dollars sent to Iran by Mr. Obama just before he left office (on an unmarked, secret American cargo plane) has spread from Yemen to the Mediterranean. Fortunately, although America should assume some responsibility for the situation left by several past administrations, this time we support a nation, Israel, that is ready and willing to defend herself. Let's see if Mr. Guterres at the UN can bring himself to say that the Israeli government has a responsibility to defend its people's right to exist; thank you, Mr. Trump, American defense against the vicious and irrational pronouncements of the UN is vital.
Obama-Rabin- Gorbachev- James Baker would be have perfect for this situation instead we have Trump- Putin- Bibi and Bolton.
The Hezbollah are tired now after the Syrian war otherwise we would have conflict already.
2
What are they doing in Lebanon? Playing marbles?
1
Friedman writes that Israel and Iran have, for the first time, “been trading blows directly, “ not through proxies! This deliberately misrepresents what is actually happening, as he knows very well that the only blows cast between the two have come directly and uniquely from Israel.
10
We continue to view the MiddleEast thru the lense of the NAtl Defense Act of 1949.....thats from like....what?....almost 70 years ago. Our entire Foreign Policy and Defense Budget is based on "containing the Soviet Union and defeating World Communism"....despite the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists...and the bigger threat is Communist China...who we insist on believing is our "trade partner interested in becoming a capitalist economy".
Iran and Israel actually seem more like mutual ALLIES than enemies.....but who can figure out those crazy middle easterners? Worse for Israel, they refuse to admit that Palestinians are actually "israelis" and treat Judaism as a state religion even though they deny thats exactly what they are doing.....So here comes China, Belt and Road Initiative, and Iran is likely a major beneficiary of this......isolating the Arabs on their precious peninsula, refusing to work in tandem with the...Israelis....to pump oil over to Europe, protected by the hapless Americans, still on a mission to bring democracy to people who dont want it.
2
Friedman, as usual, has got it right, but the Chinese seem to be picking up all the pieces.
Three words: not our problem
8
Quds an “unstoppable force”. You’re being amusingly dramatic Mr. Freedman. Quds is on the verge of extinction. I hope Iran understands that ALL military options are on the table by Israel and the US when it comes to Iran. People should know when they are defeated
Americans speak a strange language when it come to Israel and Iran. "This was the first time we saw Iran do something against Israel that was not by proxy." The Iranians put a drone in the air? And the Israelis shot it down and then attacked a base in Syria, but this is considered Iran doing something to Israel? This is so ridiculously biased, it's not worth reading.
12
“Israel has no designs on Syria; it actually prefers the devil it knows there — Assad — over chaos.”
Absolute rubbish.
Israel has been active in trying to break up Syria for many years and as usual it employed the USA to do so on its behalf. Now that President Assad has won the war against Israel, the USA, Saudi Arabia, ISIS, Al Qaeda and multiple NATO partners Israel wants to start a Regional War that will allow it to ethnically cleanse Israel itself of all Palestinians. Once again, the USA shall be launched into a major war to do Israel’s bidding. This is not a good time China has become involved in placing limits on American aggression in the middle east.
“But what is Iran doing in Syria?”
Iran was invited by President Assad of Syria in line with International Law to help Syria to defeat a massive Western led attack.
Israel miscalculated – now it has brought Iran to proximity. It needs young Americans to die for Netanyahu’s miscalculation.
6
Do you have anything reasonably intelligent to say rather than just hurling outrageous anti-Israel statements?
As bad as conditions might allegedly be for Palestinians living under Israeli rule - both as citizens living in Israel and in the WB - they live light years better than Arabs being butchered by Assad and his thugs Iran, Hezbollah and Russia.
5
Israel has about 100 nuclear weapons. Iran has zero. Your column is overblown.
9
You think the considerable billions Iran invests in Nukes will just fade away one fine day?
1
Prediction are very difficult, particularly about the future (attributed to Niels Bohr).
1
"I have no ability to independently verify that claim. But the fact that the Israelis are putting it out should raise alarm bells. "
Really? Wasn't Israel (and it's supporters here in the U.S.) pushing the Iraq WMD lie. And doesn't Israel want nothing more than to have the U.S. attack Iran on its behalf?
And as for Iran's interest in Syria, isn't it natural for them to want to try to contain Israel through alliances with her neighbors ... especially given Israel's support for the MEK terrorist group that is trying to overthow Iran's government, and given Israel's role in the murder of Iranian scientists.
8
Mr. Friedman: ".......... what is unfolding from a lookout post on the Syrian-Israel border".
Sorry Mr. Friedman, it appears that you were in the Golan Heights, which is officially part of Syria and therefore you were NOT "on the Syrian-Israeli border. Israel's occupation/annexation of the Golan Heights has never been officially accepted by the world community.
7
Just a few days ago we read on this same editorial page that Israel has a moral obligation to go to war in Syria. I spit out my coffee on that one but I reconsidered and went along with the plan because it came from a reliable source of superior beings with coastal thought processes which are morally superior to mine so I made myself agree. Now you bring this up. I wish you intellectuals could get your story straight so we non coastal, uneducated, morally inferior people would know what to believe. Coffee is expensive here in cretinland.
4
Israel may not ask America to get involved if the Iranians are extreme enough to attack them, but how exactly can it stand by the side? If Israel suffers, G-d forbid, exactly what does that spell for the rest of the ME? Some commenters below have remorse for the U.S. losing friends east of Israel. Is this going to win them more? Illogical thinking. As to assuming the Iranian leadership is rational, they do not think like westerners. Their hatred of the Jewish state makes the hatred of the Sunnis look almost good by comparison. The revolutionary guard listens to the Ayatollah, who really thinks he has G-d and destiny is his pocket. Now try rationalize with that.
3
Two leaders of powerful nations, the USA and Israel, are under investigation for criminal activity in their own countries. Are we going to be the victims of two dogs waging their tails?
4
Together with the U.S., Israel initiated the Stuxnet attack on Iran, assassinated scientists on the streets of Tehran, and repeatedly carried out deadly air raids on Iranian advisors in Syria. All this is ignored while we are asked to believe Israel's drone story that keeps changing.
After years of promoting Israel in his columns, Friedman went gaga over a Saudi "prince" who has been bombing Yemen for over three years with help from the U.S., UK, France and, yes, Israel.
Should readers take him seriously anymore?
8
In 2011, while filming in Israel, I stood near the top of Mount Hermon, which borders Syria & Lebanon. An Israeli outpost could be clearly seen through my lenses. Unlike Sara Palin who thinks she can see Russia from her house in Alaska, this was real. Israel has enemies, real enemies, a stones throw away, or all sides.
During the Cuban missile crisis, for many of us, this was our first experience with the actual threat of the enemy just miles away. That threat only lasted a few months. Israelis experience this everyday of their lives. What is going on right now is more dangerous than ever before. Talk about a “power keg”. What worries me most? The leaders in charge!
88
If there is any people that is better prepared. It is Israelites and they will defend the country to the second last family. The last family will form an a government in exile and rebuild a nation to take it back. This is what history has taught me. Hitler was bad but far better than the Queen of England or the Japanese Emperor, who are both such great people living in luxury. The difference is the Israelites: They never forgave and has never stopped reminding the world in a manner that the world feels the guilt even though far less Jews were tortured and killed than Indians by The Queen of England.
I say Iran will lose and should think hard to stay away from an ideological war with Israel with whom it does not share a border.
4
Eric: if they didn't want the threat, they probably shouldn't have stolen the land in the first place. Just a thought. And to continue to steal land from the Palestinians while causing a humanitarian crisis on the Gaza Strip with its Blockade there only invites the "enemies" to get more serious. Maybe Israel should let Gaza become free, stop stealing new land, and think about kicking out the Israelis in the settlements and giving back some land.
Friedman, you have put forth convincingly enough that the aspirations of Suleimani and the Quds Force for the greater dominance of the Arab world is dead on arrival.
You say many average Iranian have no interest, Iranian economy is in shambles, Quds forces face logistical supply nightmare, Russians are not supportive, most importantly certainty of massive Israelis reprisals. Still you cry Wolf of the "unstoppable force — Iran’s Quds Force — meet an immovable object: Israel".
Pythagoras reported to have said that the oldest, shortest words - 'yes' and 'no' - are those which require the most thought. You are saying yes and no.
Friedman has failed to make a convincing argument for "fasten your seatbelt alarm".
2
As long as both sides view the other as exixtential threats, and both think war is the solution and not peace, then war indeed is inevitable. US and Russia will not be able to stop them.
It is highly unlikely that Iran will launch an all-out attack to defend or retaliate against Israeli attacks on its forces in Syria,( provided these attacks are not sustained at a level to completely destroy Iranian forces). which have been ongoing. That it will save for an Israeli attack (also highly unlikely, because Israel will be almost completely destroyed) on Iran itself. For all its vaunted superiority, Israel has not unilaterally attacked Iran because it knows its limits. Indeed, even the US had been unwilling to attack Iran, certain that the response will be catastrophic for the region and its regional allies.
1
Mr. Friedman is a major participant in the brainwashing of the American public. The pro-Israel Hasbara machine has spent many hundreds of millions of dollars in the US to establish and maintain the pro-Israel narrative. As a result far too many Americans have the following beliefs:
Israel is “just defending itself”…. when in fact it has been the aggressor and has frequently been so aggressive that it’s actions are under investigation as war crimes.
The Palestinians are engaged in “acts of terror”….when in fact they are simply resisting the illegal occupation of their lands and the abuse of their human rights.
The only way to solve this conflict is by “”direct negotiation between the two parties” ……..when in fact it is well-known that Israel is in multiple-violation of international laws and resolution should come from the international courts.
Iran is a “state sponsor of terror” ….. when in fact Iran is supporting those resisting the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands, a resistance authorized by UN Resolution 3314. On the other hand Israel has intentionally and repeatedly attacked civilian populations in Gaza and Lebanon (definition of “terrorism”), which is considered a war crime. In addition, the US has supported terrorist groups in Central and South America whenever it was in American interests to do so.
10
Round One occurred well before February. Israel has been taking out Iranian targets in Syria for a few years now. It's been a largely one-sided affair so far. Maybe things will change and there will be an escalation, but one drone violating Israeli airspace is not sufficient grounds to reach the conclusions in this article.
3
It is worrisome. One doesn't have to perform historical gymnastics to see the parallels between the Syria situation and the religion- and treaty-bound alliances that precipitated WW I.
The simmer should be dialed down before it becomes a low boil. For this to occur, at least one of the strong players must blink. If none of them softens their position, Syria will go to boil. That's when major conflagrations are ripe for ignition.
I find it rather alarming that Mr. Friedman calmly sketches out an Israeli-Iran path to war scenario based almost exclusively - or so it seems - on Israeli sources. I am not intimately aware of all the historical points that have led us to the present situation in the Middle East. But I do know that there are many other points of view that credibly counter those of the Israeli government, whose leader, in my view, is not credible.
9
So there is this country where a lot of other countries can go and fight their enemies. Kind of like having the Super Bowl at a neutral site. Can't tell the combatants without a scorecard. Except in the Super Bowl, millions of innocent people aren't killed or displaced.
Friedman usually has interesting points but this time the view with alarm over Iran is not entirely convincing. Iran may want to extend its influence, who doesn't, but why would they want a war with Israel? They are far from each other, have no long history of conflict, have no natural resources they are fighting over, and Iran's shi'a sect doesn't even correspond to most of Israel's neighbors. It is hard to believe Iran cares all that much about the Palestinians.
But "view with alarm" gets attention. And Friedman, like almost all the American media voices, may well be misleading Americans on the chemical attack by assuming as a given that Assad ordered that attack even though no real evidence was presented and an international investigation hadn't even begun. Assad had a much weaker motive for the attack than his opponents needing to draw in the west, and rogue commanders on either side, or foreign intelligence rogue or otherwise could well have been responsible too. We don't know, but the usual cheerleaders for sending out American missiles, bombs, and drone attacks are cheering.
4
Up until very recently, every commentator and think tank in Israel,along with the idf, were assessing that Iran does not want an all-out war with Israel in Syria. So the sudden idf claim in April(which Mr Friedman informs us he cannot corroborate) that the February Iran drone was aiming to attack Israel sounds more like agitprop.
My take of the situation is that Israel, fearful that the West is not going to force an Iranian withdrawal from Syria, is threatening to start a potentially destabilizing war against Iran in Syria. The West should respond calmly by explaining to Israel that enforcing arbitrary red lines that involve bombing sovereign countries that do not pose existential threats to Israel and that are not attacking Israel is against international law.
7
Israel has been waiting for this opportunity for years. A weak and desperate U.S. President will start a war to divert the media from his impending downfall. Israel will "create" (similar to the Gulf of Tonkin incident before the Viet Nam War)" a conflict with Iran and the U.S. will support Israel with all of its military might. The result massive death and destruction in the middle east and the beginning of years if not decades of more horrific violence.
6
The answer to the constantly warring powers & sub powers in the middle east seems obvious: Sell weapons (no nukes) to all sides, make a fortune to help pay down the US 20 trillion debt, encourage all factions to fight all the other factions to the death. Extra points - and cash - awarded to whichever faction obliterates the most religious holy sites, regardless of faith or location.
When the dust clears (and that place is nothing if not a lot of dust), peace and quiet will reign and the birds will return, especially buzzards, to feed off the results. The US can then do business with whoever is left standing, and the world can turn its thoughts, prayers and attention to something else that actually advances humankind in the 21st century instead of continuing the insane squabbles, wars and chaos rooted in religious mumbo-jumbo of 2000+ years ago.
Unilateral withdrawal is a bad idea. We have an obligation to the Kurds for doing the bulk of the fighting against ISIS. However Trump will just blow them off and leave them to deal with Turkey alone.
We do need negotiation with all the involved parties for a joint withdrawal and to have Israel stop attacking whomever and wherever they please.
As long as other nations are there, there will be no solution for Syria. Overthrowing a government is very seldom a good idea because chaos normally follows.
Where then does America turn? That we need a competent leader (which we certainly don't have) goes without saying. Our support of Israel make clear our involvement. With Trump as our "leader," there is in essence, no one at the helm. Hopefully, we won't jump into this pot of boiling water until we have an in-depth understanding. And that my friends defines the impossible dream. Good help us.
1
My impression is that Friedman tried to look neutral on the subject but failed miserably.
I like a lot his economics lectures but, to my eyes, his analysis about social events are, frequently, at fault. Likewise is the understanding by some America's intellectuals about the reality of underdeveloped societies (by our western standard).
No war fixes societies that are not ready to change, it takes time, education, will to accept differences and deprecation of ancient beliefs to construct a better society. War does not bring any of that, it foster anger, fear and and explosive radicalism, exactly what we want to combat but, somehow, USA top leaders keep cherishing a wishful thinking that they can accomplish the change from the outside. Isn't the repetition of errors, despite of all rational evidence contrary, a proof of craziness?
The number of stubborn leaders that keep repeating the fallacy that brutal methods can bring desired solutions on today's world is beyond belief.
1
If so, let this be Israel's war, not ours. Iran is not a threat to the US, and it is time to instead build bridges.
Israel has successfully leveraged its lobbies to use American blood and treasure for the "creative destruction" of its neighborhood, as the neocons put it. Israel is now plenty powerful on its own, and it is time for it to make its own tough decisions, moral and military.
4
Friedman's analysis of the current political struggle within Iran is very accurate which also suggests that a regime change in Iran is most likely the best case scenario to prevent a war in the long run....it is also fair to assume that the Western powers are engaged in covert activities designed to further destabilize Iran's mullahs grip on power. On the issue of Suleimani, I hope that he is aware of the number of countries seeking his inevitable demise including Israel....a truly dangerous and cunning adversary...in addition to being a strategist.
Mr. Friedman’s analysis misses the subtleties of Russia’s role in this conflict and its constant communication with Israel and the United States to avoid an escalation.
Russia has a very limited interest in Syria - to preserve its Syrian strategic assets in the Middle East which, unfortunately from Putin’s standpoint, requires it to prop up Assad. But Russia wants to avoid an escalation and any war with Iran staged on Syrian territory, that would undermine that goal.
It was no coincidence that, in the latest Israeli air strike, no Russians were anywhere in the vicinity. Despite Russia’s claim that it received no advance warning from Israel, that was obviously not the case. Right now Russia needs Iran’s help propping up Assad. But Russia will not allow Iran to provoke an Israeli assault on Syria. At some point Russia will require Iran to remove its bases from Syria.
Russia, Israel and the United States speak to each other. The Cold War is over. Russia will not do anything to compromise its interests in Syria, or to allow Iran to escalate Russia’s limited involvement into a world war. That is not on Russia’s agenda.
24
I'm not so sure. Why does Russia not keep Assad on a leash and stop him from using chemical weapons against civilians, which forces the US and its allies to resort to military action? Clearly Assad is completely beholden to Russia (and Iran), and indeed hides in Russian bunkers protected by Russian guards? If Russia won't reign in Assad, why would they force Syria to stop building up its bases in Syria? Russia also needs Iran (i.e. the manpower provided by Iranian mercenaries) to prop up Assad. Iran has sunk billions into Syria, and wants to protect its investments and also ensure the continued survival of Hezbollah in Lebanon. I'm not so sure that Russia can dictate what Iran can or can't do in Syria.
If Israel and Iran come to blows over Syria, the Russians won't intervene, but they might provide Iranian forces with sophisticated anti-air missiles, which would make it more difficult for Israel to mount air strikes.
Russia is trying to limit its involvement to protecting the integrity of its bases along the Mediterranean Coast of Syria, yet at the same time, they have aligned themselves with the "losers" and are on the wrong side of history.
6
Thanks, Dr. Tom, for your explicit heads-up about what may well happen if Syria REALLY explodes in the near future - as you posit. Iran, Israel, Syria, Russia, US, UK, France, all circling the Middle Eastern drain right now. Unfortunately, today the earth's eyes are on what's happening to the leader of the free world and his sycophants and loyalists and those who loathe and despise him and what he has done to our country in only the first 15 months of his first term...
Alas, we Americans of all suasions, parties, colours, and beliefs are enmeshed right now in the messy business of what's happening here in the western hemisphere in the United States, and not so much what's happening in Central and South America and the Caribbean and over there - in Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Australia. We're not looking at brilliant scenarios - we're looking at what's happening one day at a time here and now.
I fail to understand how anything happening in the Middle East is seriously relevant to USA and its foreign policy. A more objective view of the situation concludes...."they've been slaughtering each other for millenia....so what else is new?" I see no purpose served for the USA attempting some allegorical goal in this region.....the end of the Age of Oil is at hand......there is no way for USA to prevent China's hegemony in this area....via Belt and Road Initiative. The only positive thing that could happen is if we could use good business sense and re-open the rusting TAPline(Trans Arabian Peninsula Pipeline) that takes the Arabian oil across the shortest route to Haifa harbour......everybody gets a cut of the action. Saudi, Jordan, Palestine, Israel. let'em use the profits to continue to slaughter each other, but dont touch the pipeline....thats the golden goose.
1
That will surely be a bracing event. How do the alliances fall in? Where will the Saracen tether his beasts?
Why not just post bulletins from "Israeli sources," rather than bothering to have Friedman gussy them up a bit?
Is Tom unable to locate any Iranians, Syrians, Lebanese to talk to?
Repeatedly he breathlessly pens columns with convoluted intrigue, as filtered through Israeli lenses, and announces this is the "real" stuff we're all missing!
Tom, remember that Iraq invasion you banged the drums for? That amazing opportunity to "transform the Middle East?" Consider the Middle East "transformed!"
Not to nitpick, but that "direct" Iranian/Israeli conflict you see emerging, has been going on for quite some time. When Israel attacks targets in which it knows it will kill Iranians, that seems fairly "direct." How exactly would you expect Israel to react if such action were taken against it's military or citizens helping another country (if the answer is "Israel doesn't help other countries," just use your imagination).
BTW, hasn't Israel been threatening to militarily attack Iran for years, and demanding the US and international community do so ?
I suppose your idea is Iran should regard none of this as "direct," and just seek solace at the UN? Maybe some other international organization where the US, our Congress and our president are sure to give it a fair shake?
Tom, if you really want to talk "real," you need to figure out the basics that every story has at least two sides. In the Middle East and the real world, it often is a lot more than two. That's "real" reality.
21
Iran v. Israel?? Not likely. Iran v. U.S.A is a more accurate title for this op-ed. To the world Israel = U.S.A., U.S.A = Israel and U.S.A./Israel = 1. So long as the U.S. continues supplying Israel with weapons paid for by the American people (despite Israel being fully capable of paying the bill themselves)...they'll just be fighting our war by proxy.
93
US would have no need to get directly involved esp if Israel confined its efforts to Syria and not Iran proper. IDF can more than TCB in that context. US of course would be non cloves in resupply weapons and perhaps some surveillance, satellite imagery etc, A smart administration would be working to shape events intelligently, there is a "positive outcomes" here for the US. Russia gets to keep its bases, there is a protected zone for refugees administered by the UN, Assad gets to start in power for now. Kurds get to control some of territory they have gained, and Iran goes home re: air bases missiles etc. Where is Jim Baker when wee need him ? We are never going to get the outcomes Obama wanted in Syria-the simple brutal fact is there is no entity force group in Syria with a mandate and capable fo running he country (welcome to the Middle East NYT readers) Russia and US working in concert can optimize the outcome for the US, refugees and Shiite Syrians. Thats the best we can hope for. Riyadh will have to accept Assad in return for Sunnis not being exterminated and Iran s footprint vastly restrained din Syria. Its called diplomacy....
2
Odd that we sit here worrying about what will
become of Trump when the Mideast is a powder keg
and God help Israel and us all if the Iranians put
a nuclear warhead on one of the missiles it intends
to launch from Syria.
Can you say August 1914? Sure, I knew you could.
No matter what or when; Israel is very small mote in the Arab eye. One that will eventually be cured by Iranian surgery, they think. I think Israel will never quit and use the nuclear option if necessary. That threat has and should continue to deter Teheran to Damascus.
1
This never ending war discussion, ego, dominance politics will soon lead us to ultimate destruction of civilization. Because nuclear bomb is searching for a reason to explode.
The condition is favorable like in the eve of world war II.
Also there are ambitious dictators in Russia, China, North Korea, Philippines, Burma.
2
I do not understand why Iran cannot fly drones over IsreaL/Isreal regularly violates Syrain airspace with drones,helicopters, jet planes which bomb Syria,Oh I forget to mention Isreali illegal seizure of the Golan Heights and its occupationRemember Iranian forces are in Syria with a permissin from the Syrian government ,the American forces are there without permission from the Syrain government,that is an illegal occupation.
12
What are you a child? "If he can, why can't I??"
Funny, you make it sound like Iran got invited to a party and Israel and the US happened to crash it for the heck of it.
a. We should all be glad Israel has the Golan Heights, considering Syria is not really a country anymore, and who knows what kind of hell would break loose from such a strategic point.
b. You really don't understand why Iran can't fly drones over Israel? really? No, you're right, Israel should let Iran, Hezbollah, and or Hamas fly over its airspace. I'm sure it's only for recreation and sightseeing.
Sorry that you think conflicts are evenly played and that there is some kind of rule book on how to confront enemies.That's not how it works. Israel will continue to do what it takes to defend itself and their people.
2
Excellent analysis Mr. Friedman!
Perhaps you should stay where you are and become the Times’ daily correspondent at the Golan Heights.
I’ve actually been there. It’s generally peaceful (now that Israel controls it) and quite lush (for the Middle East that is) and is largely populated by Druze and Jews (sounds like it could be the title of your next book).
Your last paragraph though is questionable. Is Iran and unstoppable force? Is Israel an immovable object?
If so, I do not believe there will ever be a war between (much like the the US and Russia).
If not, only God (or Allah) knows.
1
May 15 looks like the day to watch. Gate crashing by Hamas, Iranians in Syria starting a shootin’ War.
ISIS is Sunni. It took over large swaths of land in Iraq (Shia majority) and in Syria (Assad's Alawites identify with Shia). Iran came in to help Iraq and Hezbollah and Iran came to the butcher Assad's defense when his government was threatened. Israel is making common cause with Sunni despots in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and U.A.E. Jared and his two fellow Jewish peace negotiators are lining up with Israel and Jared's new buddy in Saudi Arabia. They all have huge enmity towards Iran. Trump wants to blow up the current nuclear deal with Iran. I am writing this at the third grade level because obviously Friedman is confusing the situation at a higher grade level. Israel needs to know that at some point in the near future sophisticated drones will be capable of decimating villages and cities in Israel and Israel will respond in kind. Before that happens, something on the diplomatic front needs to occur. I don't look to Trump, Jared, Bibi or Vlad to initiate this but someone somewhere needs to get this started before all hell breaks out.
1
Let them fight it out, Israel is well equipped with the best US hardware, they could take Iran apart in less than a week.
1
It is obvious to anyone who can rub two neurons together that the entire Syria war we wage is a proxy war for other interests (Israel and Saudis) and the so called atrocities of Assad are a false flag made by the CIA after the text book of weapons of mass destruction. It is sad that nowadays China is the biggest adult in the (global) room and replaced USA as a moral and neutral arbiter.
9
Tom,
Please state flatly: DJT is playing marbles while Israel-Iran-Russia play chess and DJT cannot get his marbles out of the bag.
8
I would say that DJT has lost his marbles.
1
Iran's intentions are clear by now: to gain increasing dominance in the Middle East and bide its time until it can develop The Bomb. The drone was simply a way to test the waters and keep Israel on edge. Perhaps the Iranians didn't think Israel would defend herself so aggressively, which is a reasonable assumption given our recent history of compromise and inaction when action really counted. We in Israel know that the next war, if there is one, will see Israel totally involved in demolishing whoever threatens us. I hope the Iranians now realize that.
7
Isreal in a way catalyzed the problem. Unbelievable that when Hesbollah entered the war in Syria against people who rose against tyrrany, Israel remained mute. It is immoral to stand by as a mighty force(Israel) while next door half million people have been slaughtered by a dictator. The old order of preferring a dictator to the freedom of the people is over, no need for paranoia. Alas no one heeded Johan McCain and Lindslay Graham when they advocated for finishing the dictator off when he was on rope. We lost the humanity we had and the sense of empathy, Syria is a crime that stained every human being.
3
:
The Mullahs sent the Quds brigade to Homs
projecting power closer to Riyadh.
But likewise, within range of hostile bombs;
fourteen more shaheedin drew close to God.
For Bibi, four near-neighbors are enough
those know they'd bear the cost of an attack.
To take a Persian pawn just shows he's tough
and no one wants to be the next Iraq.
'Though Putin's miffed he hadn't seen the plan
Israelis knew no Russian blood'd be spilled.
They tracked his mercenaries to the man.
No one of any notice would be killed.
A proxy war heats up in the Levant,
as Trump throws every switch he's told he can't.
Once again, Israel must clean up a Middle East mess to keep the World safe (similar to Israel's taking out nuclear reactors of both Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Assad's Syria in the past).
8
The absolute greatest mistake the Western Powers and Israel could make would be to involve themselves in a hot war in Iran. It would be the quickest way to make a "forever" enemy of a highly educated and indeed (tacitly) friendly toward the West population.
8
Israel has been assassinating people in Iran and Syria, along with bombing Syria, for several years. Have Iran or Syria assassinated anybody in Israel, or bombed it since '67 after Israel took over the Golan Heights?
Israeli fighters, bombers and drones are regularly in Syrian airspace. So far there's been but one drone (Iranian, Hezbollah, Syrian?) in Israeli airspace.
The local bully gets very worried when the neighbors get together to protect themselves.
15
Iran has been sending weapons through Syria to Hezbollah whose goal is the destruction of Israel. Israel has the right to defend itself.
4
...and the Industrial Military Complex is rubbing their hands in glee for all of the money they're about to make.
8
Addition to my previous post: My apologies, in your analysis you do elude to the Hezbollah military involvement.
Yep, pretty awful, I mean freidman's taking anything the Israeli military says as truthful. And yeah, Israel going after Iran is incredibly stupid, and probably will lead to a kenetic war between the US and Russia. There is no scenario on which this could turn out well for anyone concerned.
6
Agree. These recent strikes scream more of protecting Israel than saving Syrians. I just hope Trump doesn't get suckered like all of his predecessors.
3
I used to root for Israel but not anymore. I see nothing but trouble coming for US from that belligerent little country. We need to get away from there--fast.
14
Self-defense is not belligerence.
2
=======================
As Martin Luther stated, “The world and all that belongs to it must have the Devil as its master.”
Let’s see Iran, Israel, Russia, etc... & the U.S. with Trump at its helm wandering aimlessly into the mother of all triggers points and WWIII, well maybe Luther was onto something.
Some of the Titan’s predictions:
* DJT will lose a U.S. aircraft carrier to Davy Jones' Locker before he leaves or is dragged out of office.
This was a vision I had about a yr ago.
Save comment. I’ll be looking for credit.
The burden of being clairvoyant is that there are no surprises.
My advice is to run for the hills.
4
Mark T., consider: Putin doesn’t want to fight U.S., France & UK. No way. (And Trump doesn’t want to seriously fight his friend Vladimir - and hopes Vlad will delicately handle the parts of DJT he holds - face it, other than bobby fisher, the russians are way better at chess SEE 2017 election and Brexit referendum ). Israel on the other hand is not going to let Iran create a base in Syria. Not a chance. Can’t blame them. Sad part is, Iranian people are inherently decent and want to raise their children in peace - their current military leadership, not so much. TF not coddling Israel, just stating pragmatic truth.
1
"If it is true, [Iran]...may have been trying to launch an actual military strike on Israel from an air base in Syria, not just reconnaissance."
It's disappointing to see Mr. Friedman beat the war drums for Netanyahu's right-wing government, especially on the basis of what could very well be a fabricated claim that an Iranian "mastermind" might have launched "an actual military strike" with a drone against some unspecified Israeli target because it purportedly violated Israeli airspace.
Why is Mr. Friedman seemingly so willing to accept as true the Israeli version? Does it not seem more logical that the drone was in fact conducting reconnaissance? Neither Iran nor its "proxies" in Syria have attacked Israel with drones ever, even though the Israelis continue to engage in provocative military attacks against the Syrians and their Iranian allies.
So why is Israel behaving so belligerently in Syria and quite possibly feeding phony stories like the one Mr. Friedman appears to have accepted at face value? I submit that now that Assad and his allies have won their war, Israel would like nothing better than to start a war with Iran and Syria and to draw the USA into that war on its behalf, especially when Israel provokes the Russians into helping to defend their allies. Now is the optimum time for Israel to finish off Iran (and Assad) with US assent and support.
Too bad Mr. Friedman didn't bother even to question the credibility of Gen. Manelis' story.
9
"We will not abandon our [armed] struggle until the annihilation of Israel"
Brig. Gen. Mohammad Reza Naqdi -
Commander of the Basij militia
" the first option on our table is the annihilation of Israel."
Ayatollah Hossein Nouri Hamedani - Lecturer at religious seminary in Qom
"The Islamic world must come together to destroy the false Israeli regime....If this happens, nothing will be left of Israel."
Ayatollah Mohammed Ali Movahedi-Kermani - Tehran’s interim Friday Imam
1
This has all the makings of the apocalypse,the only thing Jesus is not coming to the Party. In Middle East wars neither side has the resources for a prolonged war, and as fast as it starts that’s as fast that it ends with both sides licking their wounds.A stalemate ensures until the next round starts.It’s the nature of the people that reside there.
2
Nah. It's Israel against Syria. Keep demanding US troops though, Thomas. Good for you!
1
A situation much like the Syrian Gordian Knot described by Mr Friedman created the unstoppable chain of mistaken identities, miscalculations, and confusion that brought about the end of the world but in Nevil Shute's gut-wrenching 1957 novel, "On The Beach." Chillingly, keep in mind that he was equally prescient in anticipating both the London Blitz and metal fatigue felling commercial airliners....
1
So let me get this straight: It is okay for Israel to regularly violate Syrian airspace with fighter jets, missiles, and drones to attack, recon, kill, and destroy Iranian forces in Syria (including civilians). BUT, Iran 'allegedly' sends one drone into 'Israeli territory' (is this Israel proper or occupied territories?) and it is the start of a war? Say what?!! Not to mention the reliance in this story on Israeli statements that the drone carried 'explosives.' Sorta like the recent Israeli statements calling the murdered Palestinian journalist in Gaza a 'terrorist.' Essentially, we cannot take Israeli statements seriously as truth. What this all boils down: Iran isn't spoiling for war, but Israel sure is. Both Russia and Iran were invited into Syria by its government. Case closed. Israel is the aggressor here, and clearly trying to get an Iranian response so it can escalate further. Maybe it would be better to consider some peace talks or dialogue, no? Yet, if Israel wants to continue this course, who are we to stop her? Problem is, Israel wants to drag us into the fray. Sometimes, allies, have different foreign policy objectives. We need to pursue ours and let Israel carry out these fights on her own-since, Iran doesn't threaten us. Remember Americans: 9/11 happened as a direct result of our unconditional support for Israeli aggression in the region. Bin Laden stated this immediately after the attacks, and we should take the sentiment in the region seriously.
8
Iran is the war monger encouraging war by promising aid to those who go to war against Israel.
"The Supreme Leader maintained that 'every combatant Palestinian group that fights the Zionist regime will receive the support of the Iranian regime.'"
Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami - Member of the Presidium of the Assembly of Experts
1
During any War, it would be greatly advantageous to have a smart bomb AND a smart President. Alas.
3
Assad and Putin are bit players. This--Iran v. Israel--is overdetermined, which is why there was a sudden "gas" attack in Syria. The US, for "the greater good", needs to remain in the Middle East. Thank you, Bush-Cheney and the CIA. More blood and treasure lost--to what end?
4
The US has no dog in this fight.
3
Easy there gunslinger with info from one side and that side has been spoiling for fight for a long time.
3
Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria and Iran -- all of them by their own admission devoted to the destruction of Israel -- have thus far succeeded only in grossly damaging, if not fully destroying, their own societies.
Three cheers for Mr. Netanyahu who has consistently leveled with his people about the dangers facing them. Three more for the people of Israel for continually returning him to office.
3
You'd have to be brain dead not to understand that the armed Iranian drone was sent over Israeli airspace for the express purpose of being shot down. Maybe the response killing the Colonel wasn't part of the Iranian plan, but those elite Iranian Red Guards are smart as anyone else and know how to manipulate a game of cat and mouse into a game of chicken to ratchet up the tension and get the inevitable regional war started.
Maybe less understood is why the Iranians want to get on with it all: it is because they know the Israelis want to get on with it all too, darn it if they just couldn't have bombed those nuke sites 10 years ago, right? Now that ISIS has been sloughed off, we can get a clean look at the theatre: Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and the US with other NATO support against Syria, Iran and Russia, with Iraq ducking for cover, and the Taliban taking afternoon walks in the poppy fields.
1
Certain people are trying to pressure Washington to support Israeli interests in Syria.
6
Hard to sort out as Netanyahu is fighting for his political life and nothing works better than external threats to shore up weak regimes.
The Iranian's know Israel will respond to missile or drone attacks. Why start doing it. And why would the Russian's let them use their bases in Syria for it.
Russia spends $100B a year on military, US $800B, UK, France, Germany another $150B. Israel $18B with unlimited resupply from US.
Iran's economy is collapsing and it is spending near 20% on military, further crippling its economy.
Hard to see a full blown war between Israel and Iran especially one started by Iran. A conventional war of planes, missiles and drones would be won by Israel.
Iran's economy is more than 4 times as big as Israel's economy.
Iran's GNP = $1.4 Trillion
Israel' GNP = $320 Billion
Iran has oil.
Israel has no oil.
2
And what would the US do if Mexico or Cuba had installed hundreds of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, all aimed at the US, able to destroy American cities in minutes?
Iran has a right to self defense.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
9
Israel & Iran used to have good relations until Iran was taken over by religious fanatics. Israel would like to return to the days where Israel bought Iranian oil & Iran bought Israeli manufactures.
1
War as a means of producing positive change or even preventing negative change, has become obsolete, futile, and meaningless. The hellish destruction of Syria, including the gassing of children, is case in point no. 1.
The overarching primary reason war doesn't work is the destructive power of nuclear weaponry. The temptation to use nuclear weapons for "positive" strategic ends must constantly arise among leaders and has been—so far— constantly spurned, for obvious reasons. "Victory" is a hollow word on that level.
Nevertheless the weapons, and even the motivations of those who don't have them and would like them, wait for human error to engulf us in global catastrophe. These weapons intensify "enemy-imaging" and fear among the diversity of nations, ethnicities and religions as they jockey for temporary advantage.
But set nuclear weapons aside, and from the perspective of the human story war is still obsolete.
Think what would happen if aliens appeared overhead. All the iron distinctions, Shia and Sunni, Persian and Jew, would melt away like mist in the sun. Identity politics would expand to mean human identity, planetary identity. We would suddenly see the common origin story all humans share.
But there already is an "alien"!—the totality of our trans-national issues: climate change, food challenges, ocean pollution—even global war itself. Will enough of us see this in time, and leave bloodletting behind with a heart-level acceptance of radical interdependence?
1
The first salvo in what is threatening to become WWIII may, in hindsight, turn out to be the Supreme Court decision that handed the 2000 election to a man of little intelligence and no strategic thinking who surrounded himself with fanatical ´nation-builders´. This is all part of the Iraq fallout,a war which you, Mr Friednman, supported. To me anyone who supported that war ' which even to a layperson had no basis whatsoever - can never be trusted again.
4
Think the unthinkable: Sunni Arab states collaborating with Israel to contain the Shi’a ascendency. It’s probably happening already and if war breaks out between Iran and Israel, will Sunni states allow Iranian hegemony? Doubt it.
Iran wouldn't be so expansive if they had to instead concentrate on their aggressive neighbor Iraq. Unfortunately Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bolton decided to turn over Iraq to the Iranians, so now the Mullahs are free to take over Lebanon, Yemen and Syria. Nice work.
They might find Israel a little harder to deal with than the civilians they drop barrel bombs on in Syria, but most of the Israeli fire will rain down upon Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria, not Tehran. I doubt they care.
1
Makes one nostalgic for the Shah. Thanks President Carter.
1
I see Friedman is back beating the drums.There's lots of oil under Golan Heights. Genie Energy is there to help. The strategic advisory board of Genie Energy is like a who's who of the booster backers for the last Middle East war.
2
it would be suicide for Iran to take on Israel in its own neighborhood. Mr. Friedman raising alarm bells where none should exist, at least not at this decibel level.
Israel needs to do more to help the Syrian people. That would do more for it than the perpetual war and fortress walls it continues to build for itself while keeping millions under occupation.
4
If Israel were to end the occupation of the West Bank, Palestinians would fire rockets & mortars from the West Bank just as Palestinians fired rockets & mortars from Gaza after Israel pulled out of Gaza.
1
I believe the greatest danger lies in Israel's belief in its own invincibility, a belief nurtured by decades of propaganda and self-styled 'mad dog' reactions to the most minor assaults by Palestinians or Hezbollah.
The truth is that Israel's nuclear 'deterrent' would be of no use whatsoever in the event of a domestic mass uprising fuelled by war. Israel cannot drop a nuclear bomb on Gaza, and not even on Lebanon or Syria, without suffering its own tragedy from the nuclear fall-out.
So this leaves Israel with the sole option of using conventional weapons: Israel's ignominious retreat from Lebanon in 2006, when Israeli fighters suffered as many casualties as Hezbollah, shattered the image of Israel's military invincibility, while Iran's astounding successes against ISIS and other radical Islamic groups in Iraq and Syria achieved the polar opposite for Iran.
The greatest existential threat to Israel is a pre-emptive Israeli attack against Iran, and recent Israeli bombings against Iranian targets in Syria may have lit the fuse to Israel's self-destruction.
I sincerely hope calmer voices in Tel Aviv and Washington will successfully persuade Israel's scaremongering leadership that Israel, not Iran, is the one sitting on a powder keg, and that they should stop playing with matches.
3
"Khomeini’s long-term goal of ensuring that Israel ceases to exist."
Fixed on the front or side of these missile trucks are banners that read, "Israel must be wiped off the map."
2
And these two really will go at it. None of this 'proportional' palaver.
Let me get this straight. The only thing you point to is the statement of the Israeli army that a drone looked like it might be carrying explosives. Of course you believe the Israeli statement, not the Iranian one.
Netanyahu would like nothing more than an attack on Iran to shore up his popularity in the face of rising corruption charges. But what interest, what motivation, would Iran have for a military fight with Israel? To be bombed? They think they can defeat Israel militarily? Take over its territory?
C'mon Thomas, get real.
8
José María Aznar, a former prime minister of Spain, recalled meeting Khamenei during his time in office in Oct. 2000. "Israel, to him, was a kind of historical cancer, an anomaly, a country to be put in flames and condemned to disappear," Aznar said. "Khamenei said very clearly that Iran must eliminate Israel and wipe it off the map."
1
I think Iran has overplayed its hand by bumping up next to Israel geographically and militarily. Israel has a greater incentive to fight and defend itself than Iran has in taking on Israel in a large scale war. There is already citizen discontent within Iran over Iran's expansionist agenda. It's difficult to envision Iranian mothers and fathers willingly sending their sons to fight in a distant land for murky reasons.
Israel has a right to defend itself and we have an obligation to help them. Our obligation should be met without bravado and with a limited objective of defending our friends and allies.
54
@Dan: not many Iranian mothers and fathers would have to worry about sending their sons to fight and die.
The majority of "Iranian" soldiers in Syria are Hazara refugees from Afghanistan - some as young as 14. The choice is usually sign up or risk deportation. This would continue to be the case if the conflict between Israel and Iran in Syria were to expand.
https://theintercept.com/2017/10/25/syria-iran-afghan-refugees/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/opinion/sunday/iran-afghanistan-refug...
4
Andrew it's obvious why Iran has skin in the game, so obvious Friedman answers the question twice, the first time wrong the second right, a stable Syria works to Iran's interests throughout the region as well as causing havoc for Israel.
1
The editorial misses one key consideration in this mess. That is; juxtaposing the policy of the United States in the Middle east.
Oh, sorry. I forgot. There is none.
Perhaps if the president wasn't so involved in his personal legal issues, Jared wasn't so involved in his personal financial issues, we had a Secretary of State.....But, I digress.
In a serious conflict with Iran, it is likely that Israel would elect to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities.
As they should
1
No mention in the article about how quickly the U.S. could be drawn in to an expanded war.
Oh, Lordy. We need a REAL President, not just someone that plays one, on TV. This is not an Apprenticeship, or a try out.
Thanks, GOP. November.
In the face of its financial problems Iran is stretching its military too thin. I think it is highly unlikely that they will seriously retaliate but I think it is highly likely that Isreal will continue to strike as they deem necessary if Iran attempts to rebuild a facility. I would not blame Netanyahu for the 'show of the drone' he used as pretext even if it werent armed. Unlike some others, It would appear that Israeli red lines stay red.
This yet one more reason, to be added to the large and growing pile, why Trump urgently needs to be impeached and removed from office: so that the American government, acting for interests of the country, not the interests of Trump's corrupt empire, can insure that Netanyahu is deterred from wrecking the nuclear agreement with Iran which is in the interest of the whole world, including Israel.
1
If I'm not mistaken, the Western powers imposed a financial blockade on Iran for a number of years now. I'm sure it must be debilitating to be on the Iranian side of those sanctions. After our support of Saddam Hussein in his war with Iran, I can see why Iran might want to strike at the most convenient Western target available. I would imagine, too that the Iranians are tired of Sunni Muslims blowing themselves up in Shiite Mosques. And so it goes.
4
This matters. Sadly.
Mercy me: Iran is "the biggest “occupying power” in the Arab world today."?? Please. Iran is in Syria at the invitation of the government. The US is not. I need not point out the obvious with respect to Israel.
8
Iran, Russia and Turkey have met to agree on how to carve-up Syria into spheres of responsibility. Assad runs Syria as much as Mussolini ran the Republic of Salo' after he was removed from power in a coup d'état in 1943. Without Russia and Iran, Assad would keel over in a matter of weeks. Iran and Russia being in Syria "at the invitation of the Syrian Government" is quite a lame joke.
1
The Iranians would have to be completely insane to start or even risk open war with Israel. That is just rank madness. They could never win even on their own. And with the Saudis and their lackey Trump and his new ultra hawk advisers, all of whom are already twitching to attack Iran even without a reason, Iran would basically beg to be incinerated. I see nothing in the past years suggesting that the Iranians are actually insane.
So this article, like so many others, feels like just more beating the drums of war to me, to prepare the public for a 'necessary' war against Iran - a necessity for which nobody could ever present any hard facts.
6
The definition of martyrdom is expanded in Iran, where martyrs are greatly revered, including martyrs from the distant past as well as martyrs from the modern age. In Iran, Shia Islam is the majority religion, at 89% of the estimated 79 million inhabitants, and is a very important part of public and political life. The Shia concept of Martyrdom has been shaped by the deaths of the early martyrs of the Shia faith, Ali and Husayn ibn Ali, and Iranian society and government have further shaped the understanding of martyrdom in the modern age. The importance of Martyrdom in Shi’a Islam has brought about the existence of a type of “cult of martyrdom” in Iranian society.
1
The Iranians are trying to militarize their position in Syria slowly and "beneath the radar", much as how Hezbollah did in Lebanon. Israel is not likely to repeat its "hands-off" approach allowed Hezbollah to acquire tens of thousands of missiles in Lebanon pointed at Israeli cities.
Iran in Syria is Israel's slow-motion Cuban Missile Crisis.
1
"al-Quds" is the Arabic word for Jerusalem. The Iranians, will attempt to conquer or destroy Israel.
Fortunately Israel is not about to allow Iran to attack their country. A conflict between Israel and Iran will be won by Israel and solve the Iran problem permanently with the destruction of Iran and the obliteration of the Quds force.
T4 is east of Homs. I apologize for the error.
Mr. Friedman is entitled to his opinion on matters concerning developments in the Middle East. However, he should be read with a healthy skepticism when reporting on the facts of developments in the region.
3
It appears Friedman is suggesting the opening and strategy of Israel here if conflict escalates: Target Suleimani, meaning not necessarily physically injure him but proceed so that whatever happens he of all people becomes liable, responsible, embarrassed, which is to say Israel will apply force to wherever Suleimani has hand so that field of play in Iran's eyes will be impossible to divorce from Suleimani's hand, and that it will be Suleimani's fault as Iran feels the force of Israel's hand.
This piece confirms for me what's happening behind the scenes.
The gas attacks were a pretext for America to step into Syria and "help" Israel wage a war on Iran.
We Americans should resist getting into Syria in a big way with all our might. When will the "experts" ever learn?
3
I am convinced Israel was reestablished in 1948 not so much as homeland for Jews, but so the Arabs can have somebody to fight with when not fighting among themselves since the beginning of history.
Then Iran, not even an Arab country with so much to lose is threatening Israel.
Wars are different now than wars in previous centuries. With non governmental armies and terrorists and their sponsors I see conflicts that will go on long after we are gone and forgotten.
At best the US and our allies can contain these never ending wars. And support our stable allies like Israel.
2
What is Iran doing in Syria? Iran wants to recreate an empire stretching from Tehran to the Mediterranean. That's what Iran is doing in Syria.
3
Next real war in Syria. This article and the Israeli press seems quite at home with the idea that Israel is the most powerful army in ME (It's not: it's the most powerful airforce). It seems quite at home with the idea you can conduct wars on someone else's soil and for short periods. (Honey, you start attacking Iranians in Syria or Iran, proper, you are sure to hear from Hezbollah. I don't think the Israeli home front is a strength at all. And combine the above, Israelis seem quite at home with the idea of nuking their adversaries. This will be Israel's last straw: the world will not accept that.
1
Israel has no intention, nor any need, to nuke Iran. Israel, with the assistance of the US and the benign neglect of the Saudis (turning off radar and taking a very long coffee break) can destroy much of Iran's nuclear program from the air and with commando raids on the ground. Iran is not North Korea: the nascent nuclear program can still be stopped militarily.
1
It’d seem the only possible solution is for Israel to allow right of return with full citizenship for the exiled Palestinians and their decedents. Then, as an actual democracy, the new nation could work towards peace with the countries it has a history of invading and disrupting.
4
If Israel allowed the return of the refugees, Israel would no long be a democracy. Is Hamas a democracy? Is the Palestinian Authority a democracy?
2
After Israel lays waste to the Syrian puppet regime and the Quds forces, it will be up to Iran what they do next. There will be no land war in Iran. But, the U.S and or Israel may be left with no choice but to explode a nuclear weapon on Iran's population.
1
Israel and Netanyahu bear some blame here as well. Syria’s battleground have given them a space to rage. But uncheckered raging does not end well and wiser minds need to prevail.
Certainly with trump, America has no judgement or sense in this cockfight. Possibly, Thoreau, Macron, Xi or Abe, unknowns or May, Merkel, too many ignorant self-absorbed Autocrats, with too little diplomacy or savvy.
1
First off, it is laughable that Sunnis (Saudis) have found common cause with Israel. I get that it temporarily serves both. But, let's not call it a foundation of anything to emerge.
Second, I am plain awed that Israel shot up the drone base. More power to them.
Iran has successfully led conflict away from its shores (Bahrain, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza), while we have focused on their nuclear ambitions. If a country wanted a nuke, it would have gotten it by now. So, the nuke business is pure show, while Iran exports violence and terror to keep its territory safe.
Now that Saudi airspace is open to Israel, and the new prince wants to flex muscle, I am not ruling out Israeli jets in Iranian territory bombing new targets.
I hope it does not get there; it is the mullahs with whom we have problems. Not with Iranians, not with its beautiful culture.
I am giving about 50% likelihood that the mullahs withdraw to railing against the west, and other crazy demagoguery within its borders that have sustained them thus far - without resorting to attacking Israel directly.
Kalidan
A very long history of warfare against the Persians demonstrates that sometimes they prevail and other times they are defeated. Just read up on the 600 years of off-and-on warfare between the Romans and the Persians.
If the Iranians continue to make trouble in the area for Israel and Saudi, they will be crushed. And Russia is backing the wrong horse.
1
Without going for precedents any farther back in time than the crusades, the war in Syria may be a starting point of World War III, disguised in the old trilateral hatred of Muslims, Jews, and Christians. However, this new War will be fought without any reference to the underlying religious incompatibilities, but as a mixture of explicit defense of the Occident on the one hand, and, on the other, eradication of a regime who has committed a crime against humanity by using poisonous gases on civilians.
What will there be at the end? At the best, a Nürenberg-like process of war criminals; at the worst, an end of the world, perhaps not in a literal sense, but still close to it.
Before bidding farewell to Syria in The Arab World, it might be of interest for the readership-at-large to know whether Turkey has a role to play.
These hot & cold running conflicts are an essential part of military industrial complex's demand drivers. The various boogymen on the world stage function much the same way the department store Santa drives toy purchases.
The nuclear weapons labs need new objectives to keep their skills sharp. Our fool-in-chief requests more "usable" nuclear weapons. They'll be the military's equivalent of the "FURBY." Every branch of the service will want their very own. In the meantime, our infrastructure falls apart, diseases wait for research dollars that are instead spent manufacturing plutonium pits. And so it goes.
3
Iran may be looking to extend its influence in some limited way but it's difficult to see what a winning Iranian strategy looks like. Israel, a nuclear power, is not going anywhere and on a hair trigger to destroy any perceived intrusion. The US, via Trump/Bolton, are looking for any excuse to bomb away Iran's nascent nuclear capability.
The fact that Israel made an attack on an Iranian base in Syria cannot be taken as evidence that Israel was or is under imminent threat from Iran. Israel shot and killed a bunch of Palestinian protestors for throwing rocks across the relatively removed border with Gaza; showing that the threshold for Israel military action is quite low. It may be that Iran is an imminent threat, but I will need to see better evidence than this.
3
The bottom line is that the US and its friends have been working with and funding jihadists, many aligned with al-Qaeda, in an expensive effort to engineer regime change in Syria. Hard to imagine anything more disgusting. And, if it succeeded, who would then step in to fill the void? I, for one, am glad it has failed. The US has no business being there, and is culpable for Syria's destruction. At the same time, let's not forget, Israel, not Iran, was buying stolen oil from ISIS, and became an accomplice in all of their crimes against humanity.
1
How about that, a real chance for a potential war not fully assimilated by the West, and certainly not by clueless and distracted Trump, busy as usual about insulting vindictively any and all that dares question his nonsense, and sexual scandals he is usually embroiled in. I wonder how can Assad govern when his country is torn to pieces by his own cruelty in crushing dissent...with the unrestricted presence of Russia and Iran, the latter two absolutely requiring to be there (in Syria) to distract their own people from incompetence and corruption of their despotic regimes. Although the phrase "America does not have friends, just interests" has been proven beyond much doubt, the fact that Trump was ready to withdraw from Syria recently, is a sign of his absolute lack of feelings towards the Syrian folks being slaughtered by Assad's forces day in and day out, by chemical and conventional means for the last 7 years. In this situation, Trump's bravado that he can't stand the ongoing killings is pure hypocrisy and opportunism to show his meddle (vanity squared, really). But I digress. Israel seems serious in it's intent to stop Iran's installment of military bases in Syria, a reasonable assumption. Have they forgotten the efficiency of the Six Day War in 1967, against the triad of Egypt, Jordan and Syria, where Israel defeated all of them at the drop of a hat?
The real problem here is the fecklessness of the Arab League, to whom the United States and other nations have sold hundreds of warplanes and a veritable arsenal that cries out for use against the Iranians and the murderous Assad regime. Instead, they do nothing. It is not a very good advertisement for their sense of morality.
Not doubt right now Israel can chew the Quds force up, but long term its shortsighted policy regarding the Palestinians and its misguided enabling of its growing Haredi population are long term threats to its stability, its democratic values, and its future prospects.
3
This article finally says it clearly: the billions obtained from the Iranian nuclear deal have been used by Iran to finance its military expansion throughout the Middle East. This is what you get when you reward an aggressive activity - such as Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons - by paying off the aggressor: he gets more aggressive. Trump is right in saying it was the dumbest deal of the century.
47
The opposite would be they would continue to produce nuclear weapons. If you are ok with that, then you need to admit this. otherwise you make no sense. personally I think the only nation to ever use nukes in war has no moral ground to say who can and cannot use them
17
The deal has so far met it's objective of keep the Iranians from further developing nuclear weapons. That's a good thing. That has been the determination of the IAEA as well as other observers.
19
The Israelis are our allies and the only country in the region that shares our values. I hope and pray that our support for Israel will not waver as they confront our common enemies.
3
This is a brilliant analysis of potential instability in Syria between Israel and the radical Iranian forces in Syria.
Nothing good could come of an escalation of force between Israel and Iranian surrogates at its borders.
It is shameless that Iranian forces would exploit the chaos in Syria to promote their extremist jihad against Israel and embolden their terrorist clients to violence.
Iran is not strong enough to take on Israel. Whatever they are doing in Syria to support Hezbollah is to serve their factional politics - misslie launches to rev up the mob. Iran’s next war is civil, at home or more likely in Saudi.
We don’t need mideast oil anymore so this tragedy of a common culture divided by religion does not threaten us if we have the good sense to steer clear. If Darwin continues to right, something better will emerge.
1
No mention of Turkey and the Kurds and the various Syrian Sunni militias supported by both Turkey and Saudi Arabia in which militias are ensconced former (could be current but circumstances dictate lying low) ISIS members.
As for veracious intel, Mr Friedman, check the now uncovered truth from 67 War, 2nd Gulf of Tonkin incident, 2003 WMD Iraq War and USS Liberty incident June 8th 67.
Those that clamor for war are those that would produce misleading intel that strengthens their case. Are we getting the correct intel from the Yemen war?
Netanyahou and his US adherents have clamored for the US to remove Iraqi, Iranian, and Syrian governments. The first one was successful and how did that work out for Israel and the US and what would the removal of Assad bring and what would take his place.
Of this I can be certain, any war that Israel involves itself in Syria, if it does not bring in overt US forces, the cost will be in the end borne by the US taxpayer.
2
One of these states has a direct border with Syria; the other is a thousand miles away, and has no business even being on the Syrian border. That says all you need to know about the aggressor.
I don’t like the seatbelt line. It seems wrong.
Interesting that Friedman casually acknowledges that Iran is using the proceeds from the nuclear agreement to fight wars in the region, including against Israel. Thanks again, Obama.
1
Read the Iranian constitution. It mandates a duty to help oppressed peoples and to provide a social safety net to its own people.
Interpret Iran's actions through this lens.
2
So why would it hard for the US to stay out of another religious war in the Middle East?
Even with Russian help if Israel cannot defend itself then all of the monety and arms we have been sending them have been wasted.
Iran is no threat to the US. Let Isreal and Iran fight stout if that is what both countries want.
So tell me again why it would be hard for the US to stay out.
3
Friedman somehow implies Iran's drone incursion was a incident event or round one , and ignores the assassination of its scientists, the more than 100 bombing raids already conducted against its forces helping Assad, among other acts of war instigated by Israel . Being Sunni / Ahmadi Muslim I am no fan of Iran however Israel will draw us , The U.S. into conflict with Iran just as surely as did those like Scooter Libby did with Iraq .
8
The excitment of "standing on the Golan Hieghts" has dulled Friedman's journalism.
The "first round" in the Isreali-Iranian conflict began months ago when Israel weighed in on the Syrian civil war on behalf of the Al Nusra jihadists.
This is all well documented. First Israel provided them with a cross-border safe haven, then medical and logistic support. But as the rebels situation deteriorated, Israel became a transshipment point for Saudi arms, and later began a series of bombing raids inside Syria in support of rebel positions.
The raid mentioned by Freidman was simply the latest of many. Israel's goal was to set up a rebel controlled buffer zone between the Golan and Damascus.
This would weaken Assad's position and the rebels would become Israel's proxy army against Iranian and other Shia forces, especially Hezbollah.
There's no evidence that the Iranian drone was over Israeli territory, or that it was armed, or given Israel's strategy, what they now count as "their territory."
Friedman is correct that this conflict is escalating, but by leaving out crucial facts he suggests that the escalation is all coming from the Iranian's. The facts tell a different story.
This does not suggest that Iran is an innocent party in this. But years ago geopolitical analysts predicted that Iran would not let Syria, which shares a border with Iran, fall into Sunni sponsored jihadist hands.
For Isreal, Assad may turn out to be the safer neighbor than what is going on now.
3
... And the Iranians not only openly announced their embarrassing losses..."
It would have been embarrassing if it happened near our borders. But it didn't, it happened near Israeli borders, it's an embarrassment for Israel. We are knocking at their front door.
In the 80's, the whole world stood behind Saddam as he attacked us, now I have Iraqis mopping my floor while their country is our backyard. We didn't even have proper missile defence back then, let alone nukes.
2
A good update. Hopefully this does not degenerate, but I see no way it won't.
Sunni/Shia conflicts go back centuries to the year 632, vastly predating modern Arab/Jewish conflicts. What is new is how the sides in this ancient fight have dragged the rest of the world in as proxies. That might have happened when oil, coveted by the rest of the world, was discovered under the deserts.
The emerging Israeli/Sunni cooperation is telling, especially since in the Iraq war, America generally sided with the Shiites, foolishly forcing Sunnis out of the Iraqi military leadership, leading to the evolution of the Sunni ISIS and its horrors, and to the present large Iranian influence in Iraq.
Where is this headed? The Sunnis and Shiites are gathering their worldwide allies for another all out war on one another, for the umpteenth time over the centuries. Those who do not learn history, such as political leaders in the U.S., are doomed to repeat it. Friedman says, "Fasten your seatbelt." Sunni vs. Shia may be the spark of the next world war, like the assassination of Ferdinand in 1914, unless everybody is very, very careful.
2
The split between the Sunnis and Shia goes back to when Mohammed died and they were disputed in how he should be succeeded. Unfortunately, Mohammed never stated how should be succeeded and considered himself to be immortal. One of the groups thought his son should go next, while the other thought it would be better if they just pick who would go next in that they didn't want him to feel no different from a king. Since then, that's what caused them to split up ever since. Even to this day they can't seem to get along despite sects of other religions doing so when they put aside their differences be it recently or a while ago. I guess with Islam, it will always be an ego problem before anything gets settled even with each other.
2
It appears as if Israel has an interest in both encouraging ongoing Iranian "overextension" in Syria, and discouraging ongoing Iranian participation close to the Golan. A classic paradox perhaps?
1
The Iranian regime is despicable. And its hard line elements have n interest in depicting Iran as a victim and on the defence. And the Iranian people want none of this ,seeking normalcy and growth That said,Israel's unhinged 'quest for security' has been defined so expansively as to give it a veto on any developments anywhere in the region. With a blank cheque from the US, Israel and MBS are the major threats in the region.(Time for Mr.Friedman to visit Iran?)
1
Interesting analysis, but a few thoughts are worth mentioning:
"Iran claims it is setting up bases in Syria to protect it from Israel, but Israel has no designs on Syria;"
Except for its occupation of the Golan heights
"it actually prefers the devil it knows there — Assad — over chaos."
which is why it has been giving secret aid to rebels (check WSJ and other articles on this)
"And it has not intervened in the civil war there except to prevent the expansion of Iran’s military infrastructure there or to retaliate for rebel or Syrian shells that fell on Israel’s territory."
Direct support for the rebels is more than mere retaliation.
Obviously, many countries in the region would welcome an Israeli attack on the Iranians in Syria, but it is far from clear if Israel can successfully carry out one. It failed in 2006 with an easier foe, so why it would win this time is a question?
6
A problem in the Middle East is that Israel needs to be contained. It is a massively violent and destabilizing force in the region - far moreso than Iran. The Western/American inclination to give Israel a free pass for all of its violence (eg. its present ongoing slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza) obfuscates these points. Consider: Israel regularly threatens violence against Iran and has attacked it through cyberwarfare. Israel is the primary driving force behind the effort in the US to destroy the Iran nuclear deal. The Iran nuclear deal was designed to help bring Iran into the mainstream by giving it a stake in the established order. However, it would also have meant improved relations between the US and Iran and it would have involved a need to recognize Iran's legitimate interests in the ME, as a regional power. Israel can't have either of those things; it needs Iran and the US at each other's throats. It also recognizes that improved relations between the US and Iran may put more pressure on Israel to actually make concessions for peace with the Palestinians. Yes, the issue is complicated by Saudi Arabia's competition with Iran for influence in the region. But a fair and equitable assessment of which parties are feeding instability and violence in ME must include Israel. Israel will go to enormous lengths to ensure its continuing hold on Palestinian land and ensuring its ability to use violence against the rest of the region with virtual impunity.
10
Lofs of carefully thought out ideas here. Another factor to consider is the geography, I would imagine miltary planners on both sides look at the location of where a conflict might centralize and both sides see stretched out, hard to defend supply lines. It’s a long way to either country through Syria. Let’s hope there can be some form of de facto resolution. Nobody deserves to die.
I view the treaty with Iran similarly to the failed 1994 treaty with North Korea: in both cases, a calculated attempt to DELAY the completion of a nuclear weapons program long enough for the NK Regime collapse, and for the Ayatollahs in Iran to be swept aside by more moderate lay forces.
The gamble with NK failed: the Regime did not collapse, and the nuclear program has essentially been completed. NK will now survive in perpetuity by exercising nuclear blackmail, and will be kept afloat by massive payments of "protection money" from South Korea.
The Iran gamble is still playing out. Although Iran may not be enriching more uranium, they are continuing with their long-range missile program, whose purpose is EXCLUSIVELY to carry nuclear warheads. If and when Iran decides to resume enrichment, the US and Israel would have a very short time to use massive air strikes to cripple the program before breakout occurred.
Iran's intent to establish permanent bases in Syria, in addition to facilitating the resupply of Hezbollah in Lebanon, also serves to make any Israeli strike against Iran proper perilous: once Iran places thousands of surface-to-surface missiles in Syria, they will be able to reign terror and devastation on Israel, and will complement Hezbollah's missile batteries in Lebanon.
Iran may desire to checkmate Israel's willingness to strike Iran by militarizing in Syria. In due course, this could even become Israel's Cuban Missile Crisis.
That's why it's a big deal.
Foreign entanglements, domestic strife, what could possibly go wrong? Friedman you are and have always been a chicken-hawk. I played with army men as a child. The tenor of your commentary reminds me of the excitement of my friends and me as we played. "Risk" was another game I enjoyed. Chess, though, actually conveyed to me the finality of the outcome of conflict.
This country has not been check-mated yet one could argue we have lost every war since 1945. It's time to put away the games before we are. We are not under attack and Israel can take care of itself. I am not against police actions if the Western World is firmly in our corner. Starting WWIII over (what else?) oil has been hovering over the world for as long as I can remember. No! Energy independence is so near I can taste it. Throwing away peace so oil oligarchs can drain the last drop of profit out of the ground must not be allowed to happen.
4
Mr. Friedman is absolutely correct.
Israel cannot allow Iran to attack it from Syria and will take all action necessary to prevent it.
For the Iranians this is not a matter of life and death. For Israel it is.
And all because of the ego of Suleimani and his power plays.
4
I enjoyed reading your analysis. But you have left out two players in your description: The Hezbollah and the Hamas.
The retaliation promised by the Russians, Iranians and Syrians may very well take the shape of limited military harassment against US troops and Israeli military.
Hezbollah fighters are involved in fighting for the Assad regime. They will benefit first hand of the military presence of Iran in Syria. The next Israeli invasion of Southern Lebanon will be very costly. Air raides will not suffice.
Regarding Hamas, it's a question: With the stalemate of a two state solution and the modification of the status of Jerusalem, push the Hamas towards a military cooperation with Hezbollah?
1
Iraq. Libya. Syria. Now Iran.
Saddam bad, so destruction of his nation results in increased Iranian power and explosion of Sunni radicalism.
Qaddafi bad, so destruction of his nation results in disorder, fleeing citizens, and spread of radicalism.
Asad bad, so destruction of his nation results in the rebirth of al Qaeda, US-NATO-Mideast nations contribute to a maelstrom that results in intensified Iranian presence and Russian military presence in an every spiraling war.
Now, Iran is bad and seeks to use Syrian territory to attack Israel.
Setting aside that for Iran to be an existential threat to Israel it would require logistics well beyond its capabilities, just what would such attack entail? Air strikes? Missile attacks? Invasion? Space prohibits how each of these options are more fantasy than reality.
What it does do is provide justification for an Israeli expanded Syrian presence. Farfetched? This past January, Nour Samaha reported in The Intercept that Israel seeks to extend its “safe-zone” policy deep into Syria.
Iran is an excuse to hide naked aggression and military occupation.
6
Mr. Friedman, Iran has not attacked or invaded another country for over 300 years. Neither will it do so now, unless attacked itself.
Israel has killed Iranian scientists inside Iran, and it has targeted Iranian facilities, and killed Iranians on the ground in Syria. The attack last week, was not the first.
Israel has invaded Syrian airspace over 100 times, during the course of the Syrian war, often on bombing raids.
Now, two months after the event, Israel tells us that the drone which entered their airspace in February, was armed with a bomb. If that drone had been armed, the world would have known it, within days. Not now, simply to try to justify their latest attack on Iranian forces inside Syria.
If Israel isn't careful, it may find its next incursion into Syrian airspace, met by Russian s400 ballistic missiles. The Russians appear to have had enough of Israeli interferrence in Syria.
7
As an Iranian guy, I truly believe that Iran is not looking for a war with Israel, at least for now. Iran's presence in Syria, was caused by ISIS threats. If you might know, Shia muslims are the archenemy for extremists muslims like ISIS, supported by Saudi Arabia. Iran went to a war with ISIS because in 2016, ISIS were just 250 km far from Iran's border. Iran has been always the victim of US voracity in ME. I hope president Trump stay in Iran nuclear deal to pave the way for more diplomatic solutions. His withdrawal will assure Iranian government and Iranian people that Win-Win negotiation will never happen between US and Iran.
5
This is the real issue that serious people are losing sleep over at night. It should have been handled in 2014, but that's past and we are going to handle it now, or watch suffering on an unimaginable scale.
How would anyone here feel about the police if a situation just like this was unfolding in their neighborhood, perhaps on their front lawn, and the cops slow-walked their response and let the bullets start flying? I can hear it now, "Where were the cops?"
Please don't bother asking who appointed the US as "the cops". First, it just plain happened; nobody else was going to do the job (1948, Berlin airlift. 1950, South Korea. Dontcha know?). And we're not alone. When things get bad enough, our allies among the liberal democracies reluctantly deputize themselves.
1
All this Near East war stuff is a result of American "We can save the World" propaganda. It already started with the interference in the Iraq/Kuwait conflict in the early 1990s. Now the mess is getting bigger and bigger.
Solutions will only be able via diplomatic ways. Further warring is senseless. Are Americans able to understand this?
3
Thanks for this article. I am glad someone is focusing on issues beyond the Trump circus.
3
The 1979 revolution in Iran that brought the clerics to power was a violent reaction to western cultural overreach during preceding decades (Ditto Afghanistan 1973, by the way). Israel is dealing with an Iranian mess that the West essentially made through their puppet the Shah. Equally, the Russia of today, in which Putin is “restoring pride”, was created by the West, as a result of relentless in-your-face eastward expansion of NATO after the Cold War. Putin is making up for this by creating a sphere of influence in the Middle East. Hence, Israel must be assisted in dealing with this awful situation it faces. But what chance does the West have of tiptoeing through this minefield with Trump in charge? God help us.
2
Dear Mr Friedman
I hope you are wrong! I have long feared that policy in Israel would get us into a much larger War, and that it might involve nuclear weapons between Superpowers.
If you are right then those premonitions are at the doorstep and the possibility they might come true is even more of a reality today. There are several things which concern me. You wrote about our war with Iraq and much of what you had to say was consistent with the Neocons of the early part of this century. I often found my self in disagreement with you. Today you seem Giddy that a war might start, and not really concerned about the consequences or innocent bystanders. How much is about Israels war hawks and religious extremist, not to mention the political Hacks in the executive and legislative branches here in America. I hope you are wrong but I fear you are not.
5
Israeli war hawks and religious extremists? What on earth does trying to keep your country alive and well have to do with “war hawks” and “religious extremists “? Do you even have a clue what the situation is? Keeping ones country from being attacked and destroyed by a country that has sworn to wipe it off the map IS the job of its leaders and military.
2
A new Great Game begins, with a declining, factious US on the margins, as we will be increasingly this century. As ideological rivals fight, China watches us all grow weaker as it builds a renewable energy future and a new Silk Road. Tell me, who do you think is best suited to win this game?
2
Yeah, why so dramatic? I have been referring to Syria as WW III for years now. It is never going to end. It may move a little, now and then, but it will never end.
Israel and Iran are not heading war between the two countries.
Iran is on purpose trying to provoke Israel.
If there was no fighting in Syria they might have succeeded but because of the fighting in Syria any attack Israel takes will not be criticized as they can pretend they are really attacking Assad when it is the Iranians they want to kill.
Iran and Israel know this will stop before actual fighting between the two counties takes place.
One thing not mentioned in this article is the Saudi's.
If push comes to shove will support Israel.
As long as Iran doesn't attack Israel, Israel will not attack them and Russia and China will do nothing to escalate the fighting.
In fact they might even realize Israel will do what they have to do and will realize they can not give Israel the excuse they need to attack Syria and will stop encouraging the Iranians.
So I am not scared that there will be fighting between Iran and Israel.
I am so sure I have already decided to spend some time in Israel this summer.
Israel has known for years and years that the Iranians are its true and worrisome enemy - not the Palestinians who have much less power. Unfortunately the US ( including Obama ) has been quite naive with Arab powers like Iran who they don’t understand - hence the giveaways to Iran for supposed roll back of nuclear ambitions that have now allowed Iranians to sponsor terror throughout the ME and attempt to take over numerous countries by proxy.
Fortunately the Israelis are very very smart and have a military ( including very superior military intelligence ) that can hopefully deal with the Iranians - I doubt the US will be of much help in this regard.
3
Iran is not an Arab power.
2
This is one reason why the nuclear deal, which freed up Iran for aggression elsewhere, was a dubious deal.
2
In the face of this Iranian build-up of military power in Syria, where is the United Nations? Where is the Arab League? Where is Russia? And where are the great Western powers? Surely, everyone see what Iran is doing, and the pressure that places on Israel to act, just as the United States was forced to act when the Soviet Union places missiles in Cuba? So why is there no concerted effort to rein-in this Iranian military adventurism? Why is there utter silence and a complete unwillingness to act until Israel must use military force within Syria?
No doubt, should Israel bring significant military power to bear in Syria, we will all hear about Israeli aggressiveness and the unlawfulness of any action they take against Iranian military units and weapons.
2
This is an outrageous prediction. Will only happen in Friedman's imagination. Israel has nuclear weapons and Iran does not. The Iran-Iraq war taught Iran a lesson. War is a waste. How many million Iranians lost their lives and for what. Stop the drum beats of war and preach conflict resolution by non violent means.
12
Tom, since when it became criminal/illegal for a country to increase its sphere of influence politically, covertly, or militarily? Yes the push back routinely comes from countries that oppose such moves. We (US) has military presence in at least 150 countries with bases in 80. We have 40,000 of our forces in Kuwait, Bahrain, Iraq, Qatar, UAE, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and many more.
The Russians and the Iranians were invited by the Government of Syria, whereas the Turks and the US are there for their own reasons. I can still understand the reasoning of Erdogan as it is their neighborhood. But why we are in Syria other than to continue what Ambassador Ford started in 2011 in Hama. President Trump may be correct, it’s time to leave Syria as he tweeted, “Mission Accomplished”.
A direct confrontation between Israel and Iran is highly unlikely, it appears both countries need a boogey man and use each other’s bluster for their own internal consumption and to divert attention from their own many problems such as the recent currency devaluation in Iran and Israel’s mis-steps of killing unarmed protesters of Gaza. Iran and Israel both have very well educated young population with a lot in common such as national pride and ingenuity. They could accomplish a lot more if only they are allowed to move on without the constant threat of continued violence. Can we help them to do just that instead of looking to divide them at the behest of Military Industrial Complex?
13
This article raises a number of questions that Mr. Friedman might want to address later.
1) Is Iran attempting to set up defensive bases in Syria in anticipation of Trump withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal and the possibility that Israel will at-tempt to destroy Iran’s nuclear production sites?
2) Could the US forestall the Iran/Israel conflict by staying with the Iran nuclear deal?
3) Is this pre-WW II Spain?
6
Ok, so the grand bargain is: with Russia and Israel's help, buttressed by pressure on the Iranian nuclear deal from the US, Germany and France: (1) Iran is ejected from Syria, (2) we tacitly accept Assad's continued control of Syria as long as he doesn't embarrass us by using chemical weapons or too many barrel bombs against civilians, (3) Russia gets to puff out its chest as kingmaker and keep their bases in Syria, (4' we keep cleaning up ISIS in Syria with our forces there (the presence of which keep Assad and the Russians honest), (5) the Saudis,Gulf Arabs, Europeans and Russia agree to fund some reconstruction in Syria, (6) in connection with stabilizing things, Syria agrees to take back some of the less threatening refugees languishing in Jordanian refugee camps (starting with the Christians who have been stranded there), which takes some pressure off of Jordan, hopefully buttressing stability there, as well as perhaps some refugees from Europe, helping moderate politicians against their ultra-nationalist foes.
Still, regrettably, no answer to the Kurdish-Turkish conflict in northern Syria, but you can't have everything, and serving up a major defeat to Iran's most militant elements while stabilizing Syria are pretty good things.
Now, does the Trump administration have the statesmanship capabilities to engineer this, without being accused of Russian collusion?
4
Obviously Trump will be accused of collusion if he plays golf, but fortunately he doesn't care.
This analysis seems to me right, but incomplete. The solution in Iraq is the traditional one: the Sunni north is the sphere of the Ottomans and the Shite South the sphere of Persia. The bargain includes that, and Kurdistan and the northern oil fields must be part of that.
But Iran really doesn't care about Israel. It is concerned about nuclear Pakistan on its border and the Farshi-Pashtuni conflict in Afghanistan.
The deal is that Iran gets out of the West, and
we divide Iraq a la the US in 1787 with a Second Amendment to protect the two regions. Then we make the Biden division of Afghanistan which Mark Landler says we are doing. That means the US, Russia, and Iran create a stable Farshi north and giving the Pashtuni to Pakistan.
But there is the final question. Is Israel going to keep a warmongering crook as President or do we take the steps, including South African sanctions on apartheid to end it, if necessary.
Israel has half the size and half the population of the Netherlands. Its people need to have the happy life of the Dutch and end the nonsense of fundamentalist, Russian non-Jew, and military control, financed by the US.
The odds are that Trump who go down as one of the great American foreign policy presidents who drastically brings peace to the Middle East. That is why the Netanyahu lobby, including Friedman, is so hysterical about him
1
How do you imagine ousting Iran from Syria?
2
I see the risk. The opinion is prefaced on one big "if" though. If Suleimani retaliates against Israel, we might witness a broader escalation between both nations. Political hostility to conflict with Israel along with domestic financial instability suggest the Suleimani might only be posturing.
Military experts like to conduct war. That's what they do. However, that doesn't mean Suleimani is off the leash yet. Yes, there's a risk but I think we're being a bit paranoid right now. Speculating about potential wars leads to war more often than actual events.
6
I know many will always look to Israel as their personal scapegoat, but in reality, Israel isn't the reason to why the Mid East is in such as mess. The real reason is because of their own internal problems. Unfortunately, the Arab Spring didn't really bring democracy to the region, just regime changes instead. The reason to why Israel had to defend their borders was mainly due to another possible attack by Hezbollah, which is just another form of counter-terrorism. In doing such, they can prevent a number of future attacks that they would do on them. Ironically, Syria has more evidence of using state sponsored terrorism than Israel does yet groups such as BDS tend turn a blind eye to that. The truth is that what's going on Syria feels more like a stalemate in that there are no winners here. Even if Assad gets overthrown, that might not even spell the end for authoritarianism for Syria, but rather a military coup instead with a different dictator in charge. Until democracy actually comes to Syria and possibly the rest of the Mid East, nothing will ever change there. For the record, Israel played no role in what is going on over in Syria either nor do they question its borders let alone want to overthrow its government either. Nonetheless, they don't want to stop Hezbollah before they can take out them, so every safety precaution is important for them to do so.
8
Certainly projecting outcomes in the Middle East is based on those in control today, and that will change soon. The biggest two players are Assad and Bibi. At some stage Israeil will be forced into some truce agreement with the PLO. Conditions in the area will not allow it to continue its intransigent non peace position today. Assad is like Castro was during the Cold War days, a puppet, and is no longer a player with Russia's presence. The true unknown is Iran, how far will they go? Or maybe the next flare will be how much longer will the U.S. and Russia allow Israel its little bombing raids within Syria. I don't think Putin/Assad will allow this to happen too much longer. The price of oil may soon get higher, real fast.
2
After WW2, and because of WW2, the United Nations was created to prevent military aggression between countries and international laws created to govern military actions and temporary occupations.
Now, 70 years later, the United Nations and international laws are being systematically circumvented, by those very nations that built these preventive structures and signed the agreements. If we allow this to continue, there will be colossal death and destruction and we'll have nobody but ourselves to blame.
14
Unfortunately , the US media including the NYT refuse to explain the underlying plan for the Middle East destabilization : THE GREATER ISRAEL PROJECT . The next target is Iran . I just hope the USA does not get sucked into Bibi's next war .
6
Surely neither Iran nor Israel will benefit from an all-out war, adding more fuel to the ongoing conflict in Syria.
Tom Friedman blames the “ego-power play” by Iran’s Quds Force leader Qasem Suleimani for tensions with Israel. The commander wants “to extend Iran’s grip on key parts of the Sunni Arab world and advance his power struggle with President Hassan Rouhani.”
Unless military clashes between Iran and Israel stop inside Syria, there’s a risk that they spiral out of control.
Concerned by the permanent stationing of Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed troops on its border, Israel has a track record of conducting independent strikes inside Syria. The strike last week on a Syria air base used by Iranian forces could trigger a retaliation from Tehran, which would only encourage Israel to act decisively by wiping out Iran’s “entire military infrastructure” in Syria. Althought this might strengthen Russia’s position in Syria, Putin may not want to shoulder the burden of propping up the Assad regime alone.
It comes as no surprise that Suleimani and Putin had fallen out with each other. Iran and Russia don’t have a warm relationship, due to Iran’s historical grievances against Russia since the tsarist era. A partition of Syria might make it easier for Russia to maintain its sphere of influence.
8
One correction : The conflict between Israel and Syria is NOT at Israel's boarder ; it is now called " Israel's frontier ." Because Golan is in Syria and Israel is trying to annex Golan illegally .
4
When GWB stood on the aircraft carrier under the sign "Mission Accomplished" he wasn't meaning the mission of making Iran the biggest influence in the Middle East. Rather he was talking about the democracy which was supposed to engulf Iraq. Well, we all know the results as we see the messy situation in that region. The unintended consequences of even well-intentioned actions can be surprising and deleterious.
Fast forward to the now and here. DJT similarly has repeated and uttered these very same words, "Mission Accomplished." The only difference is that the context is Syria now. And, once again I am not sure what mission was accomplished. But I am sure that ten years or more from now, there will be yet another conflagration whose origins can be traced to this.
I always wonder at the imagination of these folks in power who take strong actions completely forgetting the gale force winds that invariably sweeps it away. But I am even more struck by the chorus of pundits and followers who steadfastly stand by their man. Haven't we all learnt anything from past history?
16
Friedman's analysis makes sense as far as it goes. Friedman does not squarely address the central moral issue. The mullahs want no Israel, no Jewish state.
I'm not making the day to day decisions about survival in the face of such immoral hostility, so I don't presume to advise the Israeli government. But I would ask people of good will to recognize the moral asymmetry. Israelis may wish for a better government in Iran, but they wish no ill on the Iranian people. And I would ask those expressing hostility toward Israel if they truly understand the threat that Israel faces. If the answer is, in all honesty, yes - then I ask why it is that you have no objection to the existence of 56 Islamic Conference states, but you oppose the existence of one Jewish state? And I ask people of good will to take the preceding question into account in evaluating commentary on this situation.
26
So how do you justify the inhumanity towards the Palestinians driven from their homes in " Israel " with no right of return ?
4
Most of us do not oppose the existence of the State of Israel. What we oppose is Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian and Syrian land and Israel's violations of Palestinian human rights.
3
In other words you're telling us we will be dragged into the Syrian conflict even further by the Israelis, who will be acting in their best interest at the expense of ours. This may explain why our CIA has been funneling arms and sophisticated weapons to the Islamic rebels for years, because we would rather weaken Iranian influence in Syria than see a Sunni ISIS caliphate- the exact same strategy we used in Afghanistan with al Qaeda. How did that turn out? Of course none of this would be happening now if we hadn't invaded Iraq, Irans natural counterbalance, under cover of a lie to obtain access to their oil. Here's a suggestion: Let's get out of the Middle East and get back to rebuilding our country. That area of the world with it's dozens of competing tribes and religions will never be an area we can control. Our foreign policy strategy is based on a twentieth century post WWII mentality, not of today's geopolitical reality.
29
True, but then we would lose all our customers buying billions of dollars worth of weapons, which would hurt the defense industry. In addition to oil, we perpetuate war(s) for profit. The only President who could think geopolitically was Obama. The Republicans and the defense contractors could care less about geopolitics.
21
The stumbling block to accomplish your goal is, of course, Israel. What happens there? Wherever in this article by Mr. Friedman you see the word "Israel", merely substitute the words "United States" and it becomes rather clear.
1
President Obama used to quote MLK's "long arc of history" to suggest perseverance. After all, the Berlin Wall did come down. And the truce in N Ireland is still relatively intact. Alas, the world has also witnessed the openings and closings of China and Russia.
The lesson is simple. Making peace is hard work and requires constant maintenance while making war is - for the lack of a better word - easy and can happen anytime when the world doesn't actively try to avert it.
So Iran v. Israel is nothing shocking or even new. After all, the current Saudi Arabia regime seems to signal it may tolerate Israel by saying the latter has the right to exist. For Iran, making Israel a target could convince the masses that the Shiites are the real Islam and the Sunnis are the infidel. This is nothing new when you look at half the world away in the last century. The National Chinese would rather fight Communist Chinese and not the invading Japan.
But Iran v. Israel is really the tree as opposed to the forest of worldwide mayhems. With the election of Trump, the globalists have lost. The selfish nature of humanity has reared its ugly head.
Alas. unholy alliances are just temporary and paranoid enmity is forever arising. With recent technological advances, the destructive power increases exponentially and the cost and manufacturing difficulty decrease exponentially. Maybe WWIII is at the horizon. After that, humanity is no more.
5
For whatever reasons, justified or not so justified, or, whether it's a direct confrontation between Iran and Israel, or a larger war among several powers and their proxies, the consequences remain the same- large scale destruction of life and property, displacement, and a new cycle of violence adding to new uncertainties and instability.
14
The Abrahamic religions fail to understand basic universal laws. Which were known to ancient wisdom which taught:
"Hatred is never appeased by hatred."
“All beings fear violence, all fear death. Using oneself as a criterion, one should not kill or cause death” (Dhammapada v. 129)"
"Winning, one begets hostility
Losing, one lies down in pain.
The calmed lie down with ease,
Having abandoned both victory and defeat.
--Dhammapada 201"
“One who repays an angry man with anger makes things worse for himself; not retaliating, one wins a battle hard to win.”
3
Thanks. Your grasp of the Buddhist philosophy is really commendable.
Sadly India too, where these words originated, has forgotten the sage's teachings. Today's India, is all about retaliation and hindutva identity, focusing on petty differences based on so called religious identity and affiliation.
The simple solution is not to elect hardliners or in particular republican/radical right wing extremists.
President Obama asked Congress to initiate war measures in Syria in 2013 and was denied by the republican controlled body.
Israel's hard line extremist right government has for years been pushing house by house Palestinians out of their land.
Once a proper two state solution between Israelis and Palestinians ( with both sharing Jerusalem ), then most of these questions and problems will go away.
Israel will be able to build up to hard borders, which will expand for all of the other surrounding countries, allowing a peace to settle in.
The further we get away from that idea the closer we get to war between the US and Russia, which will ultimately end in all of our destruction.
23
Palestinians leaders have become very wealthy. Arafat had a net worth of $1 billion, Abbas $100 million, Abu Marzouk $2-3 billion, Khaled Mashaal, $2.6 billion. It literally pays not to make peace.
3
"Israel's hard line extremist right government has for years been pushing house by house Palestinians out of their land."
Please sir, provide proof of that asertion.
2
This has zero to do with “Palestinians” yet as usual, your comments are on them. It’s clear you have no idea of what the issues in the ME are and sad to say those who “liked” your comment lack that knowledge as well. Hint; Iran wants to control the entire ME. They don’t care one whit about Palestinians or arguments over Israel’s border.
2
The simple solution is not to elect hardliners or in particular republican/radical right wing extremists.
President Obama asked Congress to initiate war measures in Syria in 2013 and was denied by the republican controlled body.
Israel's hard line extremist right government has for years been pushing house by house Palestinians out of their land.
Once a proper two state solution between Israelis and Palestinians ( with both sharing Jerusalem ), then most of these questions and problems will go away.
Israel will be able to build up to hard borders, which will expand for all of the other surrounding countries, allowing a peace to settle in.
The further we get away from that idea the closer we get to war between the US and Russia, which will ultimately end in all of our destruction.
6
Mr. Friedman, the situation is exactly as dangerous as you describe. But how did it get to this situation? Are Iran's 'forward defences' not the direct result of U.S. foreign policy that tried to weaken and finally conquer Iran through the falling dominoes of Iraq, Libya, Syrian and Afghanistan?
U.S.-Israeli foreign policy is based entirely on misinformation. Israel's top military brass and security chiefs have stated repeatedly that Iran is not the 'existential threat' claimed by vote-seeking Netanyahu, and that the Iranian regime is 'rational'. This would reinforce the argument that Iran's build-up of forward defences is designed purely to deter an Israeli attack.
But you are right, Mr. Friedman, if Israel seeks to destroy Iran's 'forward deterrents' there is an increasing possibility of a much wider war. To repeat the abhorrent phrase used by Nikki Haley at the U.N., Iran's defences are also 'locked and loaded', strengthened by over 4 decades of U.S.-Israeli-Saudi animosity beginning with the Iraq's Western-supported Iraqi invasion of Iran in 1980. Iran is the victim, the U.S. and Israel are the region's clear aggressors.
83
Over 100,00 missiles stockpiled in Lebanon
and now a forward 'deterrent' base in Syria
and the words 'annihilation of Israel' from Iran's leadership. To Israel there is an existential threat and they have the right to initiate actions that mitigate those threats.
4
Iran is the victim? Never a more laughable statement has been uttered. Iran is a major source of the area's problems.
5
The ony victims in the region are the innocent civilians butchered, exploited, oppressed and set against each other by the despots, governments, military forces, terrorists, and religious fanatics abusing them for their own ends - for greed, power, religion, or ideology.
I would say the same thing if this post had been written claiming victimhood for Saudi Arabia, Israel, Daesh, the U.S., Russia, and many others.
Iran is no victim. Iran and every other government and group fighting proxy wars in Syria are the predators, including Assad, who will stop at no atrocity to maintain his grip on power.
So, spare us the sanctimonious cloak of victimhood that you seek to drape around Iran; you wouldn't want to start believing your own propaganda.
2
Who is responsible for the escalation of Iran/Israel tensions? IMO, the current administration’s unconditional support for unfettered Israeli expansion has emboldened Israel to adopt a more aggressive military policy, which necessitated Iran to respond, in the manner you describe, to a perceived existential threat to their internal security.
To wit, the administration’s opposition to the Iranian nuclear treaty, recognizing Jerusalem as the legitimate capital of Israel, and the appointment of John Bolton, a long-time advocate for Israeli expansion, to head the NSA.
66
You’ve got it all wrong. There is no “Israeli expansion.” Iran, not Israel, is the expansionist imperial power in the region. And they would be even if Donald Trump didn’t exist. He may be to blame for a lot, but he has nothing to do with Iranian imperial ambitions.
2
What an outrageous contortion of history and motive.
3
"Unfettered Israeli expansion"? Israel is the size of New Jersey. After the 1973 war, Israel returned all of Sinai to Egypt prior to the 1979 peace treaty between these two countries. In 2005, Israel unilaterally evacuated all of Gaza. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, now in the fourteenth year of his four-year term in office, refused Israeli Prime Minister Olmert's 2008 peace offer, providing the Palestinians with an independent state along the 1967 lines together with agreed upon land swaps and Palestinian control of east Jerusalem. One year later, after Netanyahu declared a 10-month West Bank settlement freeze "to restart peace talks" at the request of Obama, Abbas delayed entering negotiations until the last moment and then walked away from the discussions. And I suppose Iran/Israel tensions have nothing to do with the 120,000 missiles supplied by Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon, all aimed at Israeli population centers. Hezbollah's leader, Nasrallah, has labeled Israel a "cancerous tumor" and declared that "The only solution is to destroy Israel without giving it the opportunity to surrender.” Yup, the tension is all Israel's fault...
5
Israel would have been better off with chaos in Syria than an Assad victory. If Assad lost, the various rebel groups would pick up the fight -- fighting between themselves -- and it would be too difficult for Iran to establish a reliable and secure foothold in Syria. And it would have lost a direct connection to Lebanon.
3
Too late. Iran already has a secure foothold in southern Syria and has already declared war on Israel on 3 fronts.- in fact, years ago.
Most of the above posts are truly frightening in their ignorance of the Iranian motives for hegemony and war against the "infidel". Perhaps the economic downslide in Iran alluded to by Mr Friedman will diminish Iranian illusions of grandeur, despite the boost provided by the billions in sanction relief.
1
We still need to be friendly with Iran. We have held this grudge against them for far too long. Every time we get a Republican presidents want to destroy diplomacy with Iran. Just because we once had a revolution doesn't make it the path for freedom or good government.What happened to our state department? There seems to be very little communication in our world. Fear leads to war and everybody loses in wars even the retailers that sell the weapons for profits.
23
We’re not the ones holding a grudge.
“Friendliness” with a regime that regularly holds “Death to America” rallies will be both unrequited and exploited. The Iranian regime proudly defines itself as our enemy. Unfriendliness on our part has nothing to do with it.
1
Dennis:
You have missed the point. The only loses are imposed on the ordinary people, and the grunts who lose their lives.
The arms manufactures who pay the politicians make fantastic money.
Iran the biggest occupying power? How do you figure that? The only countries they have any military presence in are those that literally invited them. Definitely not the definition of occupying power I'm familiar with.
62
Don’t kid yourself. The “invitations” were issued at gun point.
2
Iraq invited Iran to occupy it? Yemen invited Iran to occupy it? The Syrian people invited Iran to occupy their country? You really believe this?
1
That was my reaction to the word "occupying" as well, that it's misleadingly hyperbolic.
We disastrously occupied Iraq after illegally invading it and destroying its economy and civil government. Israel has literally and virtually occupied land taken by force in 1967, resettling much of it with its own growing population.
Military forces of an allied neighbor nation that enter and remain by invitation of the host government (even one as despicable as Assad's) cannot honestly be referred to as occupying the host country.
4
I knew if we did strike Syria when President Barack Obama was President about the Chemicals used against the people there that our troops would be at risk because of possible boots on the ground.
President Donald Trump did strike with Missiles there on Friday, April 13, 2018 before Midnight Eastern Time.
But while we are experiencing a quick resolve where now we are going forward with our allies when it comes to chemical weapons. If a country has them or not there's still the nukes. But there is no justification for either type of weapon. Unless, the U.S. and it's Allies are attacked. Sometimes we won't know that because it's always preventable with Diplomacy. That of which there is no patience for countries that side with one another to attack the U.S. and it's Allies. There is no time to stop a war unless both sides and all sides agree that weapons of mass destruction have no place now at the hands of ISIL and terrorist countries.
1
" Unless, the U.S. and it's Allies are attacked. Sometimes we won't know that because it's always preventable with Diplomacy."
And how did "Diplomacy" work at Pearl Harbor? Maybe not "always"?
1
In other words most of the time. Yes, sometimes taken off guard. By surprise. As on December 7, 1941 in Pearl Harbor.
You forgot Iraq which now is Shia Muslim and allied with Iran. So to begin with it will be a war between Israel and Iran and Iraq. Strangely enough Israel supported the invasion of Iraq. I don't think the Iranians see Israel as other than the US. Since the Iranians refused to accept the dictator US had given them, the Shah of Iran, the US has continuously punished them. First by supporting Iraq and Saddam Hussein in the war against Iran. Even giving Iraq weapons of mass destruction, i.e. chemical weapons to use against Iran. Second by numerous sanctions. As Mr. Friedman said buckle up for WWIII. Time for both Iran and Israel to cool down and start communicating with each other. Remember as a starter that there are Synagogues in Iran but not in Saudi Arabia.
31
The piece specifically refers to Baghdad as one of the capitals that Iran controls, but that doesn't necessarily mean that Iraq would join in an Iranian confrontation with Israel.
4
Iran allows synagogues but calls for Israel’s destruction and repeatedly opposes negotiations between Israel and the Paledtinians
1
Israel warned us against Iraq invasion, US official says
Chief of staff of former secretary of state reveals that large number of senior Israeli officials warned Bush administration that invasion of Iraq would be destabilizing to region.
Yitzhak Benhorin| Published: 01.09.07 , 10:22
1
I think we can now better understand why Iran signed the nuclear deal.
Giving up on nuclear and gaining relief from sanctions allowed them to build out their conventional forces, and it's helping to fund operations in Syria now.
14
Another brilliant move by Obama, along with agreeing that Iran could forbid any inspections at any location they decided to label a "military instillation". Just sparkling.
1
So Iran would be worse off if Israel had no nuclear monopoly?
Mr. Friedman may have it backwards as to which state (s) is belligerent. Iran isn't using Syria as a base, the West is, as a stepping stone into Iran. His argument appears counter-factual. And what does he mean by "the real next war in Syria?" There is a real war there right now, waged by the US, UK and France, with Israel playing a very central but largely covert role. If Mr. Friedman included the larger strategic plan that is driving US operations there--a "re-zoning" of Middle East real estate and a drive to energy hegemony--his argument would be self-amortizing.
60
First off, Israel does not share a border with Syria. The Golan Heights is internationally recognized as being an intrinsic part of the latter country. Israel has been occupying that region since 1967 and has no more lawful claim to it than it does to Gaza or the West Bank. In any case, I'd be awfully surprised if the Quds Force actually did take on the Israelis. Iran is used to attacking Israel via their running dogs in Lebanon. The Israelis would make mincemeat of them in a direct combat situation (even if Hezbollah jumped into the fray) and wouldn't need to unleash their nuclear arsenal to do so. Russia would steer clear of the whole business and the U.S. would have no reason to intervene except for a few supportive tweets by The Stable Genius on behalf of his friend, Bibi.
43
You neglect to mention why the Golan was occupied. Did Israel instigate a war against Syria or did it nearly loose a war that was instigated by Syria? Prior to the "occupation", the Israelis were subjected to sporadic missile attacks which were launched from the Golan. They grew tired of it.
Don't confuse the Palestinian issue or the occupation of the West bank or Gaza with the occupation of the Golan, presently justified on grounds of security. Assad, or previously his father, never cared for the Palestinians and therefore, never had any justification to wage war in the first place. Neither Netanyahu nor Trump were in power when this situation took hold decades ago.
Lastly, ask the average Druze - Christian natives of the Golan - in which country they would rather live. The Golan should remain in Israel until there are better times in Syria.
Having the Iranians in Syria - now - is a clear and present danger to the entire region.
52
@Angrydoc: The Israelis were attacked in '67 and had every right to station troops on the Golan for a few months- or even a few years. At this point, let's call it what it is: an occupation, and they've shown no more willingness to negotiate its return to Syria than they have to negotiate statehood for the other territories they continue to occupy.
4
Before the Six Day War, Israel had no intentions to occupy the Golan Heights. The only reason they did was because during the that war they were attacked from that land. They felt that the only way to prevent further attacks was to annex it so that they wouldn't have to live in that fear anymore. Either way, Israel won that war and the land is now legally their's. Keep in mind that the winner of the war gets to decide what happens to to the land especially if they won it. However, Israel is more than willing to give it back to Syria in exchange for peace and knowing that no further attacks will be done from that land again either by their military or even from Hezbollah. One of the biggest fears is that there is a hill in the Golan Heights that overlooks everything to the west and can be used as a launch pad for either the Syrian military or Hezbollah to make attack at Israel. One suggestion was that Israel keeps the land includes that said terrain to make sure that will never be the case as Resolution 242 never said that Israel must return all of that land to begin with. One other thing is that land is full of Druze who fear that returning to Syria would mean that they would lose the freedom that they have under Israel, so in a way, they may not want that land to be returned to a country that once oppressed them. Seeing what happened after Israel did unilateral withdraws of both the Good Fence in 2000 and the Gaza Strip in 2005 shows that they can't do this again.
6
Both Iran and Russia have very weak domestic economies and precarious international financial positions. This is the leverage point where US power should be focused.
The proper US response in Syria is to augment its insurgent war against both ISIS and Assad regime forces so as to force Iran to spend even more money in Syria. The US, by arming and strengthening insurgent forces of the 70 percent of Syrians who are Sunnis and detest Assad and his Iranian backers, could dramatically increase the cost to both Russia and Iran of sustaining their presence in Syria.
8
"the 70 percent of Syrians who are Sunnis and detest Assad"
While 70% of Syria is Sunni, they do not all detest Assad. Some are on his side.
Which ones side with Assad? The secular ones. The ones we like best.
Which ones hate him? The jihadi crazies we fight everywhere else, but arm and help in Syria.
What is the split among Sunnis? Near half. And the other 30% sees Assad as their only protection from Sunni extremists.
This helps explain why a large part of Assad's army is Sunni, and why the Sunni population of his capital is peaceful.
The idea that all the Sunnis hate Assad is jihadi propaganda funded out of Saudi Arabia, the same place that paid for bin Laden to attack us.
32
The Sunni population of Syria has been reduced significantly via govt- and Iranian-directed killing and expulsion.
1
That's an effective idea, indeed. The sad part is there is a real war there. People are dying. Lives are being destroyed. Families are tearing apart. Refugees are fleeing to other countries. Yet, we are talking about who should defeat whom and how.
The media needs to focus more on real issues and real events as opposed the Baby Trump's histrionics and weak ego.
12
The real answer to all Middle East problems is to stop the money by:
1. Stop relying on oil. If the West didn’t need it, these countries won’t be worth fighting for. Invest in renewables and nuclear.
2. Invest in technology. Qantas just started flights from Perth to London. If I could do Sydney to London direct then the dollars flowing to Emirates, Qatar Airways etc and the corresponding stop over spending would disappear.
14
No investment is necessary to avoid Dubai or Qatar. Change planes in Singapore or India. They’re fully up to the job.
Glad to see some coverage of this at last in the NYT; not sure why it has ignored this til now. An additional unknown is just what Russia will do to aid Iran in Syria (and Lebanon to some degree). So it’s not just Iran that Israel will have to face but Russia as well.
And the US should indeed care about this unless they wish to see the Middle East be controlled by Iran and Russia. I’d hope it would also care about its ally Israel as well as other moderate Arab countries in the region.
10
It seems to me that Mr. Friedman's narrative offers more, not less, argumentation for retaining the Iran nuclear agreement intact. Demolishing it would greatly and still further exacerbate the regional instability which is already more than unstable enough.
36
You mean putting off Iran's desire to build a nuclear weapon for 10 years to destroy Israel and thereby murder another six million Jews, in return for allowing it in the meantime to develop its ICBM warhead delivery capabilities unfettered, $150 billion in cash supposedly owed the mullahs no questions asked, and no restrictions on nuclear research and modernizing its centrifuges that can be reset quickly to generate enough fissile material to build a nuclear bomb? And whatever restraints Iran is under now, expire in ten years? That nuclear agreement?
1
One of the more frightening aspects of any war between Iran and Israel is the fact that it will once again involve the U.S., since Israel continues to be viewed as an ally and a significant amout of its foreign aid and military hardware is supplied by this country.
And should Israel rise to defend itself, which doubtless it will -- that will involve the U.S. all the more deepely in a Syrian conflict that shows no sign of stopping.
11
Let me ask this question, N. Smith...
Why shouldn't the United States be supportive of the Israeli response?
After all, wasn't it Barack Obama's detachment and fear of "doing something stupid" that has allowed the situation in Syria, with the assistance of Iran, to metastasize into the mess that we are currently facing?
One thing HAS changed, and it should be important to the calculus of both Syria and Iran, and to a slightly lesser degree of Russia...the current President of the United States is more willing to act than the last one.
The United States has no history of fighting for Israel.
Why mention it.
2
Iran I spoke clearly involved in Syria in order to spread its influence and cause trouble with Israel. The Israelis are clearly justified in being concerned about Iran's presence in Syria.
Mr Friedman should have noted that Israel has the capabilities to hit Iran hard - not only Iranian forces in Syria but Iran itself.
It doesn't get much attention but Israel has been substantially beefing up its fleet of submarines over the past few years. These submarines can spend considerable time in the Persian Gulf.
I doubt the IDF has been investing in these subs in order to study deep sea coral.
11
The submarines are part of its nuclear (second)strike force. Another reason for wondering about the hysterical Israeli reaction to any change in the Middle East that it does not control.
2
They need them for defense against the submarines that the Arabs have.
1
Israel has six submarines and they are sorely needed in any full on war to protect merchant shipping to Israel which is dependent on shipping to survive.
1
I don' think Turkey would standby Iran's expansion into Syria which would put Iran on 2 borders with Turkey when presently it is east only. Would Turkey reciprocate and allow Israel to expand its bases there? Israel would need to expand its launching sites as a deterrent.
4
The Turkish border with Iran today is fairly short and relatively easy to defend by a well-trained and disciplined Turkish Army.
Also, even though there are political difficulties with the West, Turkey IS a member of NATO, and that fact will not go unnoticed in either Damascus or Tehran.
4
Don't forget that Erdogan, a few days ago called for an all out war against Israel of ALL Muslim nations....
2
Tks this was news to me. Thanks. Lets not forget Erdogan has destroyed democracy and jailed or murdered all opposition.
My own sense is that if a war happens, even as proxies in Syria, we in the West might be treated to the hilarious prospect of Israel going to war with the Saudis and other Sunni powers, such as Egypt, as allies. Make sure you stock up on popcorn.
One of Tom’s articles on this subject saw Syria as the prodding-ground for this antipathy, where Israel and Iran might poke at one another in a manner very like a safety-valve, without either needing to commit itself to serious war. If however the remnants of Sunni tribal powers that survive Assad’s chemicals and Russia’s attacks can survive in defensible enclaves anywhere near the Golan Heights, it’s quite possible that some Shia-Sunni equilibrium will be established. If that happens, isn’t it more likely that the safety-valve will survive as well and all-out war avoided? Ultimately, this would be in Russia’s interests as well, since extreme pressure on such tribes, at some point, will send out the most extreme among them to wherever ELSE they might wage jihad – such as the sympathetic elements of the Russian Federation.
Consider as well Iran’s strategic interests. Israel has no designs on them or on Syria. To spark major confrontation when Iran’s real enemies are major Sunni states, which would sit on their hands and gleefully watch Israel pulverize Iran’s military capacities in Syria, would not redound to those strategic interests.
I suspect we might see a sophisticated face-saving exercise by Iran, and not actual war.
7
Hope you are correct but this assumes that Iran is a rational actor. War might well be a diversion from internal problems.
8
The Arabs have found, and the Iranians are not suicidal, that an armed conflict with Israel is an invitation to a fair amount of destruction of the Arab forces and their national infrastructures.
I would certainly expect that a number of the Iranian nuclear facilities would be high on the target list.
The Israelis are not constrained by the niceties of Barack Obama's misguided nuclear agreement.
I doubt if they would pass up the opportunity to set Iran back a decade or two on that front.
48
Are you talking about Iran, or the USA under Trump's "leadership"?
It has always been a bitter irony to me that the same people who are so distressed by Iran are mostly the same ones that handed Iran its greatest strategic victory in a thousand years by championing the overthrow of Saddam.
The most formidable military strategist the US has faced, Qassem Suleimani, since General Giap 50 years ago, had to have been in a state of shock as the US removed Saddam and the Republican guards and installed a virtual client of the Quds force, Nouri Al- Maliki.
Thus, without firing a shot, Suleimani was able to enter Iraq and establish training and intelligence links. A bitter wonder indeed.
189
Suleimani fired many shots.
He is responsible for hundreds of dead American soldiers.
1
As were many of the Sunni tribesman we allied ourselves with before the "Awakening"movement such as elements of the Jubbour and Shammar tribes. Iran is now Iraq's largest trading partner. The culpability for dead US soldiers and the strong ties between between Iraq and Iran's military lies at the feet of the Bush administration and their Neo-con cheerleaders around the world.
Because the U.S., British and French attack on Syria to punish its regime for its vile use of chemical weapons — and Russia’s vow to respond — is actually just the second-most dangerous confrontation . . . Israel and Iran have begun quietly trading blows directly, not through proxies, in Syria."
That is incorrect, in a way that misses the real danger.
The US, Britain, and France attacked, but there has not (yet) been any response. The danger sits there as potential. It is not over.
Will we get away with it? We kept the attack small to try to slide by. The Russians have said they will respond, but not how or when. The British are freaking out in expectation of a cyberattack on their infrastucture, and claim a Russian sub stalked one of theirs. Will it blow over?
Likewise Israel has been killing Iranians (again) but Iran has not hit back (yet). Will Iran kill any Israelis? Will there be actual fight back? That is the same question as with Russia.
So why is the possibility Russia will fight back so much less dangerous than that Iran will fight back? Friedman is just more sensitive to any harm to Israel?
So far it is all one way. Russia and Iran both have just taken it. No fight back, just words.
What will happen? Anything? When?
That remains an open question, and not just whether Israel will be one of the targets.
29
Russian submarines ALWAYS try to stalk those of the NATO countries.
The end of the Cold War did not stop THAT practice.
It's a cat-and-mouse game every time a missile carrying submarine leaves port...
And since ALL NATO submarines carry missile in one form or another, as many of them as can be tracked WILL be tracked.
And rest assured, we do the same to the Russian and Chinese fleets of submarines...It is the essense of submarine warfare these days.
4
The War was and is Sunni vs Shia. The United States has exploited this for Natural resources and to maintain our economic power. The Interesting development is the Israelis. They, if everyone should by now understand, will bend to no one when it comes to their own national security are a back channel ally to which many countries are going to behind the diplomacy. Rest assured that Israel will not let Iran call the shots in Syria and they most definitely will attack Iran when they attain a nuclear weapon. That latter is a near certainty.
15
Although I am appreciative of the information and insight that Friedman presents about the military confrontations between Israel & Iran within Syria, the rest of the column is overblown. The two sides can engage in this military sparring for a long time, without either one (or any other power) feeling especially compelled to see it escalate. Elements in Iran may well aspire to greater dominance in the Arab world (where the real fight is generally between Shiite & Sunni factions) by some maneuvers against Israel, but there is nothing of great value to be gained by Iran or Suleimani in a winner-take-all conflagration. Israel may be fearful of Iran developing nuclear arms & moving them closer to Israel (remember Netanyahu's UN speech, with the graphic of an old-fashioned bomb & lines drawn across it for progress toward an Iranian nuclear weapon), but the reality is, none of that does much for Iran. Iran's target is certainly most Middle Eastern capitals, but Jerusalem is on the bottom of the list, not the top. Sparring with Israel has indirect purposes for Iran, and that's what this column obscures with its hyperventilating.
25
If Iran and Israel go to war, Israelis will support every possible measure to defend its cities and fields. Iranians, long wary of foreign involvements and the mounting death toll of Iranian soldiers in Lebanon and Syria, may find completely unacceptable the loss of far more treasure and life fighting an enemy so far from their borders. Taking on Israel in an offensive war is not the same as defending Iran against the invading armies of Saddam Hussein. In attacking Israel directly, the mullahs are gambling not only with considerable military losses; they will be risking a regime change led by their own citizens.
176
They are already at war.
3
Ever since I can remember the ME has been in chaos, so it would seem after over almost half a century that chaos is the policy choice. In addition the process is turning nation states back into tribal areas, reversing the British and French initiatives in making them nation states in the first place. Why nothing ever gets solved is no one is interested in solving anything. Weak tribal states is the goal, one day we will get there.
8
A war between Israel and Iran in Syria may be limited, if it remains in Syria and if Russia and the United States do not intervene. As a result of 9/11, The U.S. has been fighting wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Syria. The first two have been limited wars, but the one in Syria threatens to be a war which draws in at least four nations--Israel, Iran, Russia, and the United States and become unlimited.
The great military theorist and historian, Carl von Clausewitz, declared that the first rule of war should be for the political leaders to establish their aims. Donald Trump is reluctant to think about war aims, let alone announce them. Congress should demand that he do so.
22
"Donald Trump is reluctant to think about war aims, let alone announce them."
The US has been in Syria long enough to destroy the place, and Libya too. That has been years. Did we EVER have war aims? Do we in Afghanistan after 17 years?
The problem is not the one man. The problem is The Blob which has elevated the method of war everywhere without any articulable war aims.
We have a much bigger problem than just one man.
33
It seems that one aim of such long engagements is war itself - the military-industrial complex tips its hat.
24
Just saw Jodi Ernst addressing the Syrian issue, although not this specific threat. She danced round holding Trump's feet to the fire. Don't expect anything out of this self centric lackeys.
"After all, even before this, many average Iranians were publicly asking what in the world is Iran doing spending billions of dollars — which were supposed to go to Iranians as a result of the lifting of sanctions from the Iran nuclear deal — fighting wars in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen."
Excellent point. Suleimani certainly does not represent the wishes and desires of the Iranian people.
39
My hope is that the powerful creativity and intelligence of the Iranian people--women and men-- will someday be set free from a brutal, militaristic theocracy bent on the destruction of the Jews.
There is something much bigger then meets the eye going on here. If Iran gets defeated in Syria which they will if they go up against Israel this could lead to many new developments. Firstly it would mean the fall of Assad and Russia would have to reconsider its plans for having a base in Syria. The Kurds would emerge as an Independent State. Hezballah would lose its major benefactor and thus be weakened. And lastly the people of Iran would see the Quods force lose their standing and may feel empowered enough to overthrow the evil powers ruling over them. Israel does need the backing of America,France and Britain but once and for all Assad, the Ayatollahs in Iran and there benefactor Russia will be handed a crushing defeat and Iran will not get its hands on a nuclear weapons. This isn't wishful thinking but can happen if there would be a clear plan between the democratic countries and Israel. The world can't let evil triumph.
31
Good strategy. Start maneuvers to allow the other side to cannibalize their current amigos.
Unfortunately Henry, this would be yet another 'slam dunk' fail in warfare - Afghanistan? It all sounds great on paper and we have the biggest and the best guns, but you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Ensuing chaos and enduring warfare are the likeliest outcomes to the Israeli slam dunk plan. Unless we all go nuclear of course, then all bets are off.
1
What's most interesting about this is that even you recognized that it was wishful thinking before you posted it, but decided to overrride your own insight and include a preemptive denial.
1
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/05/opinion/l-iraq-s-weapons-a-vital-inqu...
Iraq's Weapons: A Vital Inquiry
To the Editor:
Thomas L. Friedman feels that it is not necessary to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to justify the war but only to ''preserve the credibility of the Bush team, the neocons, Tony Blair and the C.I.A.'' *
No, Mr. Friedman, finding those weapons is necessary to preserve the open societies you claim are worth defending from the ''terrorism bubble.''
Such societies will ultimately be more damaged by lying governments than by any amount of terrorism.
You cannot defend an open society by rendering that society no longer open.
* https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/04/opinion/because-we-could.html
JANE H. GRANT
Pound Ridge, N.Y., June 4, 2003
107
Actually Jane, I think the concluding paragraph from the 03/06/04 column spot on:
"But my ultimate point is this: Finding Iraq's W.M.D.'s is necessary to preserve the credibility of the Bush team, the neocons, Tony Blair and the C.I.A. But rebuilding Iraq is necessary to win the war. I won't feel one whit more secure if we find Saddam's W.M.D.'s, because I never felt he would use them on us. But I will feel terribly insecure if we fail to put Iraq onto a progressive path. Because if that doesn't happen, the terrorism bubble will reinflate and bad things will follow. Mr. Bush's credibility rides on finding W.M.D.'s, but America's future, and the future of the Mideast, rides on our building a different Iraq. We must not forget that."
Whether Iraq could have worked out differently we will never know, but I don't think Bush's failures disprove Friedman's analysis.
2
This has little to do with WMD. Iran openly admits it is seeking to engage Israel, and already has attacked (in February, by armed drone) at least once.
3
And your exact point is relative to the article??????
1
The Gingham Dog and/or the Calico Cat wanting the U.S. to get into it with them. The only difference is that eating each other up will take forever and use up a lot of the resources we in this country need to help ourselves. Jimmy Carter as president has been severely criticized, but the only intervention that ended at the least in a cold peace was with his help, and it has lasted to this day. It may be an oversimplification of the current situation between Israel and everybody else there, but it's something. The next best thing is to invest in energy sources as alternatives to fossil fuels and state a determination to intervene only as peace broker and only when all of them announce a sincere intention of wanting peace.
17
Perhaps WWIII has already begun, driven by the long-standing Shia - Sunni rivalry in the region. Is it a matter of time until the major powers outside the region get dragged in to protect this or that regional interest?
In a saner administration, the U.S. might have the patience to try multi-lateral diplomacy and finesse our way out of the region. That seems to have been Obama's path. He saw the no-win situation for what it was. And he could confront Putin in other venues where it mattered. With Trump, Bolton, and Pompeo, who knows what will happen?
162
Surely you’re joking...multilateral diplomacy ? Have you missed the last 9 years ? We’ve been played for fools. This will be handled in a different way now- one that the thuggish regime in Tehran understands better
5
.Start to worry when the armies mass around Megiddo
4
In 2015, I wrote extensively as to why I was skeptical of the nuclear deal struck between Iran and six world powers, which included the US. I explained that those accusing President Obama of having failed to prevent a nuclear war in the short term were wrong, but so were those who failed to recognize that the treaty would increase instability and conventional wars. The entire treaty, while successful in attempting to limit nuclear war in the short term, rested on an unsupportable assumption that Iran's leadership was monolithic and unified when it was, (and remains), highly factionalized. I am no foreign policy expert, but it seemed obvious that the treaty gave expansionist elements in Iran's military, and specifically Suleimani and the Quds Force, a clear path to engage in massive conventional wars that would engulf the region. When I wrote about it here in the Times it was as welcome as a person at a house party who tries telling a bunch of self-congratulating people (who don't want to hear it) that while they may have stopped a gas-main leak, they've done it by starting electric fires burning inside the walls. The fact that the warmongering John Bolton is now National Security Advisor makes things infinitely worse. I take no solace in having been right, though reneging on the Iran treaty, however flawed, will only make things worse. Still, America needs to stay out of this. No matter how we intervene in the region it never seems to serve our interests, nor bring stability.
44
How can an educated American criticize another country for wanting to extend its influence in its neighborhood?
That said, I agree that Iran should not be exacerbating regional tensions by extending its military capabilities along Israel's border with Syria (like the US has been doing in trying to bring its missiles up to Russia's European border!). Israel's reaction is predictable, and there can be no other interpretation than that Iran means it as a threat.
Although Iranians have generally celebrated Iran's victories in Iraq and Syria against ISIS, I doubt very much that they would support provoking a war with Israel. Everyone would suffer greatly, for no discernible gain.
Iranians want to live in peaceful coexistence with their neighbors. I hope President Rouhani is able to prevail over his more aggressive colleagues in the government and military.
35
Iran doesn't want peace but they can not afford an attack from Israel so they will not provoke Israel anymore than they have.
That isn't being pro peace.
It's being smart.
2
"Israel and Iran are now a hair-trigger away from going to the next level — and if that happens, the U.S. and Russia may find it difficult to stay out".
That sounds ominous, I hope US will stay out of this impending WWIII. The strikes launched by the United States, Britain, and France against three chemical weapons storage and research facilities may not be enough reassurance for Israel, Israel is concerned about the Iranian buildup across its northern frontier. Iran is building a military infrastructure in Syria to create a land corridor to Lebanon to counter Israel, adding Iran's ability to strike quickly to deter Israel from attacking its nuclear facilities. There are enough reasons for Israel to worry about Iran, let Israel deal with Iran. USA should stay out of this mess.
10
"Israel and Iran are now a hair-trigger away from going to the next level"
It is only Israel that is on a hair-trigger. They took Friedman to the border and they foamed at the mouth for his benefit.
52
Are you really basing you contention because they let Friedman go to the border.
I don't think allowing Friedman go to the border proves they are on a hair trigger.
If they were there would be more fighting then what has occurred.
The corridor you mention serves 2 purposes: 1. Advance Iran's objective to choke and destroy Israel , and 2. Build an oil pipe into and thru the Mediterranean going to Europe.
1
Alrighty, another Middle East war , and with our new Trump Doctrine no diplomacy world view I'll be willing to bet there will be more American boots on the ground than any other country in the West, being we no longer have friends west of Jerusalem. Add that to our 2 to 3 trillion dollar war debt and 35 thousand American casualties we racked up the last 17 years.
22
You might also mention that the Syrian and Iraqi Kurds are setting up to use eastern Syria to strengthen their war with Turkey, our NATO ally. The Kurds' goal is to unite all Kurdish lands into one Kurdistan. That includes parts of eastern Syria, northern Iraq, a significant portion of Turkey & a corner of Iran. If the Kurds enter into a war with Turkey, the NATO treaty demands that the United States ally with Turkey against the Kurds - the people who did the heavy lifting in driving ISIS from Mosul, Iraq and Rakka, Syria (which Trump takes total credit for, of course).
21
If I recall, the State Department of the US counseled H. W. Bush not to destroy the Iraqi Republican Guards after the ill-fated invasion of Kuwait. They cited four basic reasons and HW let them free after they crossed back into Iraq. As we all know, the GOP couldn't forgive HW, and we ended up with Clinton. Later, HW's son GW "corrected" his father's mistake and the subsequent war fairly immediately caused three of the four predictions to come to pass. The fourth, the destabilization of Turkey because of the Kurds, is now finally happening as Beartooth describes.
One of the earlier predictions, the reawakening of the millennium-old Shiite-Sunni conflict is now in full motion. Now that we have built up the power of Iran by removing Iraq, the real battle will be between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Trump seems bent on making certain that both sides will be nuclear armed as soon as possible.
As far as I can see, any conflict with Israel pales in importance compared to the Shiite-Sunni conflict to come.
17
Mr Friedman I was not aware that you were a military analyst. Do you really think that Qasem Suleimani is not aware of Israel's air power. Notwithstanding the occasional air strike by Israel, I don't believe that there will be a major confrontation between Iran and Israel in the near future. Iranians are playing the long game and are very good at it.
75
Not so sure you are right.
I will say that about Putin.
Just like China is behind North Korea Russia is behind Iran and these two countries can play a very long game.
That long game is what Israel is willing to fight to disrupt, hence the point if this editorial.
Mr.Friedman, your dispatches from the Middle East are both fascinating and frightening.We did not know that the Quds Force under Suleimani had such expansionist intentions.This adds to the toxic mix which is the Middle East.It is tragic that the young people in Iran and Syria have lived in war and turmoil for the first part of the 21st century and even now what do they have to look forward to.
7
Janet ; Here is another of Tom Freidman`s articles on the situation in the Near East.
In 2003, NYT`s journalist Thom Friedman counted 25 members of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations saying, “if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened”.
The conclusion is that Only Israel benefited from the Iraq invasion. Ie It ended Iraq`s support for some measure of justice for the indigenous people of Palestine. Now these same people are pushing the US to do the same to Iran.
It is time to change the US election campaign funding laws so that a lobby can no longer game the system & thereby control Congress against the interests of the nation.
2
And into this hellish mix we have every assurance that the Trump administration is preparing to walk away from the Iran nuclear agreement of 2015. It would seem that Iran is baiting Donald Trump to do just that so that it can throw off the fetters of the agreement that stops it from developing a nuclear device.
The quiet but looming force in the area is Israel, whose prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, directly lobbied the American Congress to defeat, if it could, President Obama's leadership in the six-nation coalition that took the growl out of the Iranian muzzle.
But Trump, with the hawkish John Bolton and the Muslim-hating Michael Pompeo are set to direct American "foreign policy," the unhappy region is apparently getting ready for a real-time dress rehearsal for something we once thought not possible or credible in our lifetime: World War III.
Israel has every right to defend its territory from foreign attack but this also gives a wayward American administration the "cover" it seeks to embed itself more deeply into a situation in which it simply cannot win. Perhaps this is really Israel's problem and they should solve it without American intervention, for, if Trump sends in U.S. troops, Israel won't, leaving us to, once again, fight others' battles.
The wild card here is Donald Trump, a completely unstable individual whose currency is chaos at home and incoherence abroad. Once the Iran deal is dead, Israel can attack Iran preemptively. How does Trump respond?
92
Respond to Israel defending itself, that would be either nothing or support.
2
Trump will respond by following orders issued by his trusted advisor and son-in-law, and by his major campaign donors , like in a Banana Republic .
3
Do you really think Iran is fettered by Obama’s popcorn string handcuffs?
"Unless Suleimani backs down, you are about to see in Syria an unstoppable force — Iran’s Quds Force — meet an immovable object: Israel."
the article by Mr Friedman made salient points, but like so many op-eds and posts it takes only the last sentence to discredit itself in its entirety. as of now and foe the foreseeable future Israel is both unstoppable and immovable.
2
The Quds force is far from unstoppable, more like puny especially far from their supply chain. It would be costly but they would be eliminated.
12
I disagree. Hezbollahs seasoned fighters would most likely destroy IDF land forces as they did in Lebanon a decade ago. Israel’s advantage would be AirPower, which may be neutralized by Russian defenses. The US would of course be dragged in as Israel’s cats paw. Bad all around. Everyone breathe and back off.
And The Trump Regime has been looking for an excuse to target Iran. And any old " reason " will do. Trump, Pompeo, Bolton and Mathis. The four horsemen of the Mideast Apocalypse. A chance to saber rattle and rally the Base. After all, what's a little death and destruction compared to losing the Midterms ??? Know the phrase " No guts, No glory " ??? Not applicable here. More like " No Brains, No Chance ". For Everyone. Seriously.
91
“But what is Iran doing in Syria?”
Invited by Syria to fight ISIS, which was created by the US invasion of Iraq. You know the war you supported.
Why are the Saudis in Syria with US support backing al Qaeda and other rebel terrorist groups such as the Army of Islam, who were holding hostages in cages in Douma?
Why is the US supporting the Saudis bombing of Yemen causing massive famine, where we are supply arms such as cluster bombs. Yemen is facing the worlds worst famine, where millions could die.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/09/middleeast/yemen-famine-saudi-arabia/inde...
304
Iran will probably help Syria be whole again and regain territorial integrity after 7 years of civil war.
After that there is the question of Syrian territory occupied and annexed by Israel to be settled. The international community has done nothing to bring about an Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Golan Heights. One can hardly expect peace between Syria and Israel as long as the occupation continues. Maybe Iran's presence in Syria will eventually help promote a permanent peace in the Middle East.
11
Could it be the Oil Banking and Defense Industries entanglements and corruption that binds America to a Medieval Theocratic Tyranny? How pervasive is the corruption?
7
Remind me of Friedman's stance on regime change in Iraq. Wasn't he an advocate of what turned into a disaster? Israel knows how to care of itself.
59
Although not specifically mentioned here, Saudi Arabia and Israel have crawled into bed together in their mutual fear of Iran. Whether that fear is justified or not is beside the point. Both nations want Iran out of the picture.
Israel has a tremendous military force, no doubt. Saudi Arabia has the money to bankroll the conflict. Add to this equation, Saudi Arabia has a new leader that is much more liberal and is more willing to ally with Israel if such an alliance is to the benefit of the Kingdom. The Palestinian issue has become an inconvenience. They have outlived their usefulness to them.
As far as US leadership is concerned, we have an incompetent commander-in-chief whose administration is collapsing under its own weight of corruption, deceit and internal conflict. He's too busy fending off the FBI and his past sexual conquests. Something to do with the rule of law.
It's all there folks. Now think about this. If the lid blows, there is no way Iraq can stay out as it is basically an Iranian proxy. Ditto Lebanon. They have literally tens of thousands of missiles at the ready.
The Middle East has been marching toward a colossal Sunni/Shiite war for years now. That's why all these proxies have been put in place as opposing sides jockey for power.
If Syria-Iran-Israel blows, the entire region blows. That's what we are dealing with here. Throw out your old maps. The cartographers will have much work to do.
164
The evangelicals are just itching for a war between Israel and Iran. They will insist the US enter to protect Israel and Russia will enter to protect Iran. And the Christians won’t actually go to war, they are praying for Jesus to return and take them away. Somebody needs to take them away if they think they are capable of causing the second coming just because they want it to happen.
290
How is it devout Christians believe their all-knowing God won’t notice they have rigged the situation to bring on the Rapture?
15
You've got it wrong. It isn't the evangelicals; it's the Israel lobby in the U.S. They'll push the U.S. into war with Iran in Syria. Just you watch.
8
There is no honest power broker in Middle East.
The Sunnis,the Shias and the Israelis are all to be blamed in equal proportions . Add to this , the festering resentment of the Palestinians in being driven out of their homelands and being left in a limbo for decades.
All this has been a catalyst for the upsurge in radical Islam and its terror offshoots.
The result is that the entire world is paying for the intransigence of the few .
30
Iran's presence in Syria and its seemingly blank-check support for Hezbollah are proof, if any were needed, that Iran is a bad actor. It does not follow from this that the Iran nuclear agreement should be abandoned, but it does mean that Americans should not look through rose-colored glasses at Iran. There is a tendency since Trump's election to see Iran that way. It is wrong. Our evil, corrupt president's enemy is not our friend. Our previous, non-evil president's non-enemy is also not our friend.
Also, Friedman rationalizes Iran's actions in Lebanon in terms of internal politics. To dismiss the insane, fanatical hatred of Israel by the jihadist Iranian leadership as a driving cause of Iranian behavior in Syria and Lebanon is to dismiss an important fact, and to dismiss it is to lose the big picture.
11
Mr. Friedman correctly recognizes, as many of us do, that Israel will be forced to respond to ANY provocation from Iran and its proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, et al.) that is threatening in the least.
The weakening Iranian economy may enable young Iranians to take to the streets (as they have done a time or two in the recent past). This certainly bears a watchful eye from all of us in the West.
As much as the US remains the Great Satan and Israel remains as the Little Satan, internal politics in Iran may determine how long Iran chooses to cast its lot with the Russians in Syria.
This may be an opportunity for the Islamic Republic to fall without the US, its Allies, Israel, et al. directly intervening in Teheran.
We certainly live in interesting times.
6
Remember Friedman's and Israel's cheer leading for a U.S. attack on Iraq, Israel's big enemy at the time, when every reasonable analyst knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. Let us not be led into attacking Iran to protect Israel. Nuclear armed Israel is entirely capable of protecting itself. All our misguided interventions in the middle east solve nothing, and Americans become targets of hate.
357
Israel played no role in either Iraq wars. Whether you are talking about the Persian Gulf War or the more recent one, Israel stayed neutral in both of them. They didn't even fight in the first one despite the number of chemical attacks Saddam Hussein did at them. Overall, neither Iraq wars were done for Israel.
7
Israel warned us against Iraq invasion, US official says
Chief of staff of former secretary of state reveals that large number of senior Israeli officials warned Bush administration that invasion of Iraq would be destabilizing to region. 'The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy
11
It's a little like the good samaritan breaking up a bar fight, and having both assailants turn on them. Happens all the time.
10
Always keep in mind during the prelude to a large-scale war that many members of the media and political class, from both parties, take great enjoyment and pleasure in watching American troops march into battle. I'm not accusing Mr. Friedman of this but detached language like "round 1" and "fasten your seatbelt" are troubling. War is fun for many people as long as bombs are dropping over Westchester and Bethesda.
18
Understood these two are not at the best of terms.
However we must ask why is this our problem?
17
Nuclear fall out knows no borders. You can’t just hold your breath and hope for a good outcome. More like WW3 than a regional conflict. John Bolton gets to go into hiding with the rest of these war hungry vermin.
It would be a tragedy if the US took any more military action in the Mideast. I used to support Israel. Not anymore. Their treatment of the Palestinians is unconscionable.
268
When the Palestinians stop building tunnels into Israel and stop attacking Israel, Israel will leave them alone. Don't forget that Israel completely pulled out of Gaza amny years ago.
16
Are you aware of what the palestinians teach their children in school?
14
Israel pulling out of Gaza is akin to the person who invaded your house giving you back a think slice of your back yard. Would you be happy with that?
Thanks Mr. Friedman for your update about "what's really going on" in the Middle East.
A dangerous situation indeed. Israel will fight to the death to defend itself. And perhaps this Suelieman character cannot be contained. Maybe Russia can have some influence on Iran. Hard to say.
My heart goes out to the Iranian people who don't want these wars anymore than the citizens of the US want continued wars.
In the meantime ny seat belt is securely fastened.
5
I think this article is written assuming that Israelis have honest intentions. They take any opportunity to show their military might. What about Nethanyahu's and Trump's political problems, how do they mix in with your story?
109
...it's that 'shiny object' concept yet again.
That seems to be wearing thin. The Syria attack captured the news cycle for the better part of 24 hours, Saturday / the weekend, when many of the regular news shows are generally repeats from Friday.
Monday morning with Cohen's hearing soon to take place, the focus will be back on trumpolini and his band of thieves.
They couldn't even get that right.
2
It’s easy to understand Israel’s unease about Syria as an Iranian launch pad. It’s also easy to see that Assad won’t survive a full scale Israel-Iran war. Syria will become simply a no-man’s land between the Israel-Iran hot war, run by gangs and mobsters. Iran’s nuclear capacity will be bombed into dust. Russia isn’t going to sit and watch, and the Allies won’t watch Russia bomb Israel.
Good chance for WW III, eh? All begun by Iran lighting the match.
13
"Iran claims it is setting up bases in Syria to protect it from Israel, but Israel has no designs on Syria; it actually prefers the devil it knows there — Assad — over chaos."
In other words, Mr. Friedman, you're suggesting that Israel might interfere in Syria on Assad's behalf?
10
There was a time when kings were honorable, and they would sometimes agree to single-handed combat--just the two of them--to settle disputes with a minimum of bloodshed.
So here's my idea. Trump could offer to settle his many, many disputes as a sumo wrestler. It's easy to visualize, no?
25
This has been brewing for a long time. Why now? I guess the Iranians figure they have Assad in hand with Putin keeping the rest of us occupied. This is where tump is a wildcard. He will not back down from Iran or Putin on this. Trump already wants to bomb Iran's nuclear program and a land war in Syria pitting Israel and Iran as the opponents will be the perfect excuse.
2
How come this column does not mention Saudi Arabia? They will not likely stand by while Iran occupies Syria. Very possible we will see a shooting war there with many countries involves. As usual the middle east is a tinder box and America needs to step up or we may find ourselves with WW3
1
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/15/opinion/war-syria-iran-israel.html
April 15, 2018
The Real Next War in Syria: Iran vs. Israel
By Thomas L. Friedman
Iran’s elite Quds Force is trying to use Syria as a base to pressure Israel. Israel is not going to stand for it.
[ There is no shred of evidence that this is true, that Iran is trying to use Syria as a base to pressure Israel. Why try to provoke a war? Why not write to encourage peace? ]
47
I guess we all must be misinterpreting the intentions behind the annual "Death to Israel" rallies, organized by the government and attended by thousands, in Tehran!
2
Iran wants Israel destroyed. Iranians chant "Death to Israel."
Iran has paraded a missile with the sign 'Death to Israel' attached to it during a huge military parade
3
One can trace all of the current Middle East power plays to the first President to stand in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner. That misbegotten war has unintended consequences that will last many lifetimes. And while those consequences may be unintended they were not unforeseen.
376
The origins of the issue go far far back before the ' Mission Accomplished' scenario. I could list dozens of examples, but you can do your own research.
22
How odd in retrospect: “mission accomplished” smashed the secular government of tyrant Saddam Hussein and unleashed religious revenge of the Shia majority against their Sunni oppressors. Odd because W used the context of 9/11 where radical Saudi Sunnis attacked America. Yet here we are, holding hands and arming Saudi Arabia, here we are assisting the massacre of Yemen. Odd to witness the Sunni Al Qaeda, Sunni ISIS mayhem and terror and widespread blame for terror to Iran and shielding Saudi Arabia.
Al Qaeda and ISIS have distracted the world from the plight of Palestinians who are all Sunnis yet we read about Hezbollah a Shia organization cooperating with Sunni Hamas. Interesting.
Most interesting: Iran and Russia allied in Syria. Only 10% of Russian Muslims are Shia. What is Putin’s motive regarding his domestic policies? Syria is primarily Sunni as is Turkey yet we are led to believe that Iran is doing little to defeat Sunni ISIS in Syria but is instead looking to Israel?
Israel’s problem is Palestinian oppression. Israel seizes Palestinian territory, builds a wall, and has an air war against ghettoized Palestinians who do not have an airport? Shouldn’t we be focused on the Palestinians? Try surveying all Muslims and ask: What is the number one problem in the Middle East? Theocracy or Palestinians?
23
Nonsense.
This goes back to the birth of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
This goes back to Zionists, jihadists and crusaders.
This goes back to Arabs, Europeans, Kurds, Persians and Turks.
This goes back to colonialism and world war.
This goes back to fossil fuels.
This goes back to vertebrate mammal primate apes.
10
Interesting and informative article, Mr Friedman, but there are at least two glaring omissions in your analysis. How will tearing up the nuclear agreement with Iran affect the Iranian leadership? And how can John Bolton's strident call for regime change in Iran induce them to seek a peaceful resolution with Israel. None of this bodes well for either the region or the world. Fasten our seat belts? Head for our bomb shelters is more like it.
239
There is nothing that the West can do to make Iran want to seek peace with Israel other than regime change. If they wanted to have a prosperous economy and peace with their neighbours they would stop funding, arming and training proxy forces throughout the Middle East and just make peace.
Its hard for us in the West to comprehend that some people/leadership prefer to have conflict in order to win using violence but c'est la vie.
6
Thank goodness none of this matters to the United States.
What happens in Israel, Syria and Iran is none of my concern. Let them live together in peace - or not.
The citizens of this country are not well served by permanent war. Wars that are ill-defined and lack an end goal. Wars that have no exit.
The first step in ending the wars is not entering into additional wars. Let the rest of the world worry about their own security. Let's use our massive, extremely expensive, war-machine to protect the borders.
187
Is this tongue in cheek isolationism? I hope not. Because if it's real then it's really short sighted. Not only because whatever happens on the world stage matters to the United States, naturally at different levels, but the real threats to the country are not at our borders, they come from within, for example, when someone looks at a school building and only sees an expense.
72
Mr.Magoo would agree with you. Not a positive endorsement. See 20th century wars for edification.
28
WillT26 - This is 2018 not 200 years ago. Security in the Middle East impacts the world. And, lest we forget, diplomacy should be the first and foremost projection of American and allied efforts. Sending the military limits, not maximizes, our options.
76