More evidence that Israel supports ISIS and Jihadists in Syria
More evidence that Israel supports ISIS and Jihadists in Syria
Fundamentalism is the Mirror Image of Zionist Fundamentalism
This blog has carried a number of articles on the symmetry between Israel’s ethno-religious fundamentalism with its messianic settlers and the growing ascendancy within Likud of those who believe in a Third Temple and the
destruction of the Golden Mosque. That
symmetry meets its fulfilment in the Syrian civil war.
General Levy at the Herzliya security conference explaining why the main enemy is not Iran but ISIS
Israel has a number of good reasons, from its perspective, to support
both Al-Nusra, the Al Qaeda group which has recently rebranded itself as Jabhat
Fatah al-Sham and ISIS. Zionism is
based on much the same racist and confessional ideology.
It has reproduced itself throughout the Middle East.
ISIS and al-Nusra have long fed of the confessionalism and sectarianism
that the Israeli state has created. They
also have a congruence of interests.
Israel’s main enemy in the Middle East is Iran, which it sees
as a regional competitor. To Israeli strategists
Iran, Syria and Lebanon form the Shi’ite
axis of evil. It is not surprising
therefore that Israel and Netanyahu look to ISIS and Sunni states like Saudi
Arabia and Qatar as allies in the region.
It is quite clear that despite Israel’s claims that its support
for al-Nusra was only humanitarian, tending its wounded fighters, the
relationship is far deeper. A moment’s
thought would tell you that Israel’s denials of co-operation are lies and
falsehoods. Can you imagine that Israel would
tend Hamas fighters!
Sunni Ahmed al-Rifai shrine near Tal Afar is bulldozed
‘a report from the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF)
reveals that Israel has been working closely with Syrian rebels in the Golan
Heights and have kept close contact over the past 18 months. The report was
submitted to the UN Security Council at the beginning of the month.
The documents show that Israel has been doing more than simply treating
wounded Syrian civilians in hospitals. This and a few past reports have
described transfer of unspecified supplies from Israel to the Syrian rebels,
and sightings of IDF soldiers meeting with the Syrian opposition east of the
green zone, as well as incidents when Israeli soldiers opened up the fence to
allow Syrians through who did not appear to be injured.’
Inbar is director of the Begin-Sadat Center for
Strategic Studies, and a professor at Bar-Ilan University, in Ramat Gan near
Tel Aviv. He is a academic of some repute in western elite circles.
The Begin-Sadat centre has some form. Another one of its
luminaries is Mordechai Kedar, an Israeli academic who once
advocated rape as a weapon of war to be used against the families of alleged
Palestinian attackers. Speaking to an Israeli radio show in 2014 he said, “the
only thing that deters them is if they know that their sister or their mother
will be raped in the event that they are caught. What can you do, that’s the
culture in which we live.”
In a mind-bending series of utterly cynical and
blood-thirsty leaps of logic, Inbar argues that Islamic State is the least-bad
of a series of enemies in the region for Israel. Considering the fact that
Islamic State has rarely (if ever) engaged in combat with Israel, there is a
certain horrible logic to his claims.
“A weak IS is,
counter-intuitively, preferable to a destroyed IS,” Inbar wrote. “The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose. Why help
the brutal Assad regime win the Syrian civil war?”
Inbar sees Iran, Syria and the Lebanese
resistance group Hizballah as far greater enemies to Israel. Although Hizballah
is now engaged in the brutal civil war in Syria on the side of the regime, it
defeated Israeli occupations forces in two wars. First of all, in a long
guerilla war to liberate the south of Lebanon. The result of that was Israel
and its proxy forces being driven out under fire in 2000. Secondly, Hizballah
fought Israel to a standstill during its brutal 2006 invasion of Lebanon.
Hizballah is a serious military force which
(before its divisive intervention in the Syrian civil war) once commanded
massive and cross-sectarian popular support all across the Arab world. It’s no
wonder then that Israel would prefer to see its guns turned against targets
other than Israel. “Hizballah … is being
seriously taxed by the fight against” Islamic State, gloats Inbar.
And what of Islamic State crimes, which will no
doubt continue and intensify if it is not militarily defeated? No matter, says
Inbar: “the Western distaste for IS
brutality and immorality should not obfuscate strategic clarity … stability is
not a value in and of itself. It is desirable only if it serves our interests.”
These statements may be utterly morally
reprehensible, but at least they have a certain frankness to them.
Iran of course, is deemed a threat to Israel. Its
nuclear energy programme is at the heart of these claims, and hence Inbar
agitates against the deal made with Iran in regard to this. Israel once
collaborated with the US on cyberwarfare projects such as Stuxnet, which
attacked and sabotaged Iran’s nuclear energy plants. But the real threat is
Iran’s independence as a sovereign state – something neither the US global
hegemon nor the Israeli regional hegemon wish to tolerate.
administration has inflated the threat from IS in order to legitimize Iran as a
‘responsible’ actor that will, supposedly, fight IS in the Middle East,” claims Inbar. A rather odd and conspiratorial
formulation considering that Iranian and Iranian-backed forces have been at war
against Islamic State in both Syria and Iraq.
This is not the first time that influential and
powerful Israeli figures have argued in favour of using Islamic State as a way
to indirectly attack Iran. In January, the then defence minister Moshe Yaalon said at a
conference that if he had to pick a side out of Iran and Islamic
State in Syria: “I choose the Islamic
State”. He argued that “our greatest
enemy is the Iranian regime”.
At the same conference, former Israeli army
commander Yoav Galant argued that “developing
ties between Israel’s allies and enemies as they join forces to fight Islamic
State pose a threat to Israel,” and that the de facto alliance between Iran
and several Western countries fighting Islamic State in Syria and Iraq “creates new challenges for Israel.”
Their logic then, was very similar to Inbar’s.
Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the US, said in 2014 that Israel wants to “let the Sunni evil prevail” over the greater “evil” of Iran. Speaking in the context of a massacre of Iraqi
soldiers, he seemed to argue that Israel should allow the “Islamic State” to win.