The Cold War was binary. The countries of the Middle East lined up in either the Soviet or the American camp. Then they were provided with arms, training, security, and intelligence. The American side was originally made up of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel. While the Soviets developed Egypt, Syria and Iraq. Negotiations could get complicated. Here is a typical example, with King Hussein of Jordan trying to get some air defense.
United States military assistance to Jordan began on a small scale in 1950, but in 1957 the United States became Jordan’s principal source of equipment following the termination of the British subsidy. A large-scale purchase of ground force equipment in 1965 was followed in 1967 by orders for F-104 Starfighter aircraft and support gear. After the disastrous losses of military equipment during the June 1967 War, United States military aid, most of which had been supplied on a credit basis, was shifted to grant form. Additional purchases of American hardware were made possible by massive postwar financing from friendly Arab states.
Although Jordanian forces played only a token role in the October 1973 War with Israel, Arab losses renewed Hussein’s determination to expand and modernize Jordan’s military capabilities. An improved air defense system had the highest priority. After a study of Jordan’s air defense needs, the United States Department of Defense recommended supplying Jordan a mixture of American weapons, including the Improved Hawk SAM, the Vulcan 20mm radar-guided antiaircraft gun, and the Redeye shoulder-fired missile. The proposal resulted in protracted negotiations in Washington between the United States Congress and the executive branch. The Israeli Embassy in Washington and American Jewish organizations applied strong pressure on Congress to reject the sale, arguing that the twenty-one Hawk batteries Jordan wanted would reinforce the Soviet-supplied SAM capability of Syria, making all of Israel vulnerable to the combined weapons coverage. Hussein threatened publicly to withdraw the request and accept an offer of comparable missiles from the Soviet Union. Inasmuch as the weapons were to be paid for by strongly anticommunist Saudi Arabia, however, Hussein was obliged to reject Moscow’s offer. Ultimately a compromise was reached under which the United States would provide fourteen Improved Hawk batteries to be permanently emplaced as defensive weapons in the Amman-Az Zarqa area and at airfields and radar installations east and south of Amman. Final agreement was reached on the US$540 million arrangement in September 1976.
Soviet supplied SAM missiles bedeviled the Israelis throughout the 1973 war, particularly in the Sinai. I was thinking of this this morning as I watched Shimon Peres give a speech and answer questions at some Washington think tank. Peres is very impressive individual and incredibly smart. He gave a broad historical view of the international situation. And he brought up an important point about Syria. Syria participated on both the 1967 and 1973 wars. It’s true that they lost badly both times, but they were at least capable of launching an attack. But there is a very good reason why they will not launch any attacks today. They have no resupply of Soviet weapons. They use it, they lose it.
An interesting thing happened right before the Egyptians launched the 1973 war. Sadat expelled something like 30,000 Soviet military advisors from his country. After the war the Egyptians flipped sides and became aligned with the United States. As part of that deal, they recognized Israel. It took another fifteen years, but eventually Jordan recognized Israel as well.
Once Egypt and Jordan were in the American camp, Israel no longer was at risk of a two-front war. Lebanon was embroiled in a civil war, and only Syria could menace them. Once the Soviet Union collapsed, Syria was isolated and toothless. Iraq’s army was destroyed in 1991 and never allowed to rebuild. If they rebuild today, it will be with American arms. Only one thing prevented a total victory for Israel and, ironically, it came not from Arabs, but from Persians.
It was the Iranian Revolution in 1979 that offered some continued measure of resistance. And it was the Israeli occupation of Lebanon that gave them their chance. Hizbollah became a proxy army for the Iranians and the Syrians became junior partners in the deal, eventually taking over Lebanon completely. This is the unsettled business that we are witnessing today.
As Peres laid out, the issues are very complicated. Taking away any real chance for Israel to be challenged in a conventional way has resulted in the rise of asymmetric warfare and terrorism. There is no other way for Syria to press for a return of the Golan Heights. There is no other way for Arabs to fight for the Palestinians. And there is no better way for Iran to export their form of political Islam.
When America essentially neutered the Arab military threat, through co-option, they inadvertently empowered the Shi’a sect of Islam. Invading Iraq and handing it over to the Shi’a merely exacerbated the problem. It is not clear at all how Israel can stop Hizbollah from raining rockets down on the northern part of their country.
The easiest way, at least conceptually, would be to change the regime in Damascus. This could, in theory, cut the supply line to Lebanon and put Syria in the Jordan, Egypt, pro-western camp. I would not advise holding elections, however, as these would result in a new militantly hostile Sunni Arab government. The only upside would be that they would have much less affinity for Iran and for Hizbollah. They also would not have any arms. It’s possible such a government could be gradually co-opted through corruption. It’s more likely, however, that regime change in Syria would come through some sort of coup. The prerequisite would have to be some kind of humiliation for the young Assad.
When I start putting all these pieces together in my head, and I take into account the goals of the neo-conservatives, it is pretty clear what the goal is. The U.S. and the Israelis do not want to give up the settlements and make a lasting peace. They want to eliminate the threat to Israel. To do this they have essentially taken over the militaries of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan. They have broken Iraq and Lebanon as states. Now they need to eliminate the Iranian beachhead in southern Lebanon and Syria. With that, there will be no more effective resistance.
The only remaining problem will be Iran’s potential nuclear capabilities. Iran may have to be humiliated and broken into pieces as well.
We can only imagine the costs in treasure and blood of such a plan. The risks are immense. We are already seeing cracks in the pro-Western coalition, with Saudi Arabia threatening war. Oil embargoes may follow. Coups in Jordan and Egypt are possible. Increasing amounts of internal suppression will be required. Any possibility of democracy will become toxic to our interests. And the international community will not stand for it.
But this is the neo-conservative vision. As I have laid it out here, it seems to be all about Israel. But that is not the case. There are enormous business opportunities in adding new client states that need new militaries built for them. There are also the contracts to develop the oil fields in Iraq and potentially in Iran.
There is a confluence of interests at play here. Grown-ups in Washington, however, are getting very nervous. They seem to understand that that the neo-conservative agenda is madness. How much easier and saner and humane would it be for Israel to make an agreement and hand over what is necessary to solve the Palestinian question?
We keep hearing about how the Arabs want to destroy Israel. But they have no capability to do so. The only way that could happen is if Jordan and Egypt renounced their peace treaties and launched an attack, knowing that America would cut off their resupply. Even less can Syria mount an attack. Israel’s only real threat is that they alienate the American public to such a degree that we cut off aid and military support. That is only possible if they follow the neo-conservative playbook and turn the whole world against us, cause an oil embargo, and embroil us in a regional war.
Israel needs to solve the Palestinian question. What they are doing now is madness and will lead to tragedy.
