Jewish World Review
Oct. 6, 2006 / 14 Tishrei, 5767
The clouds of the coming war are converging upon Israel. But the
Jewish State's political and military leaders refuse to look up at the
darkening sky.
The Russian bear has awakened after fifteen years of hibernation. Under
the leadership of former KGB commander President Vladimir Putin, Russia
is reasserting its traditional hostility towards Israel.
On Tuesday, Russian military engineers landed in Beirut. Their arrival
signaled the first time that Russian forces have openly deployed in the
Middle East. In the past Soviet forces in Syria and Egypt operated under
the official cover of "military advisors." Today those "advisors" are "engineers."
The Russian forces, which will officially number some 550 troops, are tasked
with rebuilding a number of bridges that the IDF destroyed during the recent
war. They will operate outside the command of the UNIFIL.
Mosnews news service reported on Wednesday that the engineers will be
protected by commando platoons from Russia's 42nd motorized rifle division
permanently deployed in Chechnya. According to the report, these commando
platoons are part of the Vostok and Zapad Battalions both of which are
commanded by Muslim officers who report directly to the main intelligence
department of the Russian Army's General Staff in Moscow. The Vostok Battalion
is commanded by Maj. Sulim Yamadayev who Mosnews refers to as a "former
rebel commander."
With the deployment of former Chechen rebels as Russian military commandos
in Lebanon, the report this week exposing Russia's intelligence support
for Hizbullah during the recent war takes on disturbing strategic significance.
According to Jane's Defense Weekly the Russian listening post on the
Syrian side of the Golan Heights provided Hizbullah with a continuous supply
of intelligence throughout the conflict.
Much still remains to be reported about the impressive intelligence
capabilities that Hizbullah demonstrated this summer. But from what has
already been made public, we know that Hizbullah's high degree of competence
in electronic intelligence caused significant damage to IDF operations.
Now we learn that Moscow stood behind at least one layer of Hizbullah's
intelligence prowess.
Moscow's assistance to Hizbullah was not limited to intelligence sharing.
The majority of IDF casualties in the fighting were caused by Russian-made
Kornet anti-tank missiles that made their way to Hizbullah fighters through
Syria. Indeed, as we learn more about Russia's role, it appears that Russia's
support for Hizbullah may well have been as significant as Syria's support
for the terror organization. And now we have Chechens in Lebanon.
Russian backing of Hizbullah, like its support for Syria and Iran has
been matched by its extreme, Cold War-esque hostility towards Israel. On
Tuesday, Channel 2 reported that for the past few months Putin has been
obsessively demanding that the government transfer proprietary rights and
control to the Russian government over the Russian Compound, which has
served as a police station since the British Mandate, and other Russian
historical buildings in central Jerusalem.
Putin's demand, which has no legal foundation or diplomatic precedent,
exposes startling disrespect for Israeli sovereignty. According to Channel
2, Russian diplomats have been raising this obnoxious demand at the start
of every meeting they have had with Israeli officials for the past several
months. This most recently reported slap in the face joins a long list
of diplomatic crises that Russia has fomented in the past few months.
In just one example, last month the Russians cancelled the Russia-Israel
trade fair in Tel Aviv on the eve of its opening. Russian businessmen who
had already arrived in Israel and were unable to get flights home the day
of the announcement, were ordered by the Russian embassy to remain in their
hotel rooms until they returned to the airport for the first available
flight to Russia.
Then there is Russia's unstinting support for Iran's nuclear weapons
program. During the latest of his frequent visits to Teheran, Tuesday Russian
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced, yet again, that Russia opposes
all international sanctions against Iran. Indeed, since Iran's nuclear
program was exposed three years ago, Russia has acted as Iran's defender
against every US attempt to galvanize the international community to take
action to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capabilities.
In 1967 Russia played a central role in fanning the flames of war in
Syria. In the months that preceded the Six Day War, Moscow fed Damascus
a steady diet of false intelligence indicating that Israel was planning
to invade. In the summer of 1973, the Soviets also encouraged Syria to
join Egypt in invading Israel.
Whether or not Russia is interested in fomenting the next war, its intentions
are less relevant than how Russia's extreme positions are interpreted by
the Arabs. Judging by Syrian President Bashar Assad's recent bellicose
speeches, it appears that Damascus believes that Russia will support Syria
if it goes to war against Israel. In his latest address regarding Syria's
willingness to go to war if Israel doesn't fork over the Golan Heights
forthwith in "peace negotiations," Assad made clear his belief that whatever
its level of intensity, a Syrian war against Israel could well advance
his interests.
Russian influence is also evident in Assad's "peace" rhetoric. His protestations
of willingness to conduct negotiations with Israel are taken directly from
the Soviet playbook. As the reactions the speech elicited from leaders
of the pro-Syrian camp in the Israeli Left like Maj. Gen. (ret.) Uri Saguy,
Education Minister Yuli Tamir, Ha'aretz columnist Yoel Marcus, and MK Azmi
Bishara made clear, all that is needed to manipulate Israeli public opinion
regarding Syrian intentions is a hollow and disingenuous Syrian announcement:
If we abide by all of Damascus's demands, (something Damascus will never
allow us to do), then Syria will give us "peace," and if we don't, then
the responsibility for the war that will ensue will be our own.
What is Israel doing to meet these gathering threats?
First we have our elected leaders. They contend with the growing threats
by denying them, giving in to them and attempting to change the subject.
The Olmert-Livni-Peretz government had no public reaction to the Russian-Chechen
deployment in Lebanon. As far as the Israeli government is concerned, this
issue, like the fact that Hizbullah has returned to its pre-war positions
and that UNIFIL forces are doing nothing to prevent its rapid rearmament,
should be of no interest to the public.
According to Channel 2, Olmert is now leaning towards capitulating to
Russia's demands and transferring proprietorship over the Russian Compound
to the Russian government during his upcoming visit to Moscow.
As to Syria, rather than crafting a Syria policy, the government argues
about the desirability of giving Syria the Golan Heights now or later.
Above and beyond all else, as Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense
Minister Amir Peretz proclaim, from the government's perspective, the best
way to deal with the growing military threats is to ignore them and destroy
Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria.
Our political leaders are not the only ones involved here. It is the
IDF's duty to sound the alarm bells and contend with these threats. But
the IDF is doing no such thing. Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz
claims that he is devoting all of his time to rebuilding the IDF after
what he refers to as its "mediocre" performance in Lebanon. Practically
speaking, however, Halutz is not contending with the threats. In an interview
with Yediot Ahronot on Sunday, Halutz discounted the Syrian developments
and maintained his position that we won the war in Lebanon and are feared
by Hizbullah.
Far from contending with the IDF's "mediocrity," Halutz is prolonging
it. The IDF's "mediocre" land campaign in Lebanon was led by Deputy COS
Maj. Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky, Operations Directorate Chief Maj. Gen. Gadi
Eisenkot and Brig. Gen. Tal Russo who oversaw the IDF's special operations.
Rather than contend with these officers' demonstrated mediocrity, Halutz
has promoted them. Eisenkot was appointed the new commander of Northern
Command, and Russo will be promoted to major general and replace Eisenkot
as head of Operations. Furthermore, Maj. Gen. Iddo Nehushtan who commands
the Planning Directorate supports opening negotiations with Syria. Halutz
promoted Nehushtan to his position after he led the IDF's failed media
campaign during the conflict.
Halutz has repeatedly stated that he will resign if he feels that his
authority is no longer accepted by the army. Yet, the primary officers
who have felt the brunt of his authority - Armored Brigade 7 commander
Col. Amnon Eshel and Maj. Gen. Yiftach Ron-Tal - are the most prominent
officers who have forthrightly attempted to point out the reality of the
IDF's defeat.
It is clear why Halutz behaves this way. If he were to sound the alarm
bells about the rising dangers in the north, he would have to admit that
he failed in his command of the war. Similarly, if he were to bring new
blood into the ground forces' chain of command, he would be effectively
admitting that Kaplinsky, Eisenkot, Russo, and he as their commander, led
the war irresponsibly. Indeed, the only way that Halutz can keep his job
is by not contending with the dangerous military realities that have arisen
as a result of the IDF's defeat in the war against Hizbullah this summer.
It is this policy of denial that motivated Halutz to fire Maj. Gen.
Ron-Tal from the service on Wednesday night for Ron-Tal's statement of
the obvious: The year the IDF devoted to training its forces to expel the
9,500 Israeli civilians from Gaza and northern Samaria last summer came
at the expense of training for war against Israel's enemies. It was also
this policy of denial that motivated Halutz to bar Eshel from promotion
for two years after Eshel pointed out how incompetently Division 91 Commander
Brig. Gen. Gal Hirsh commanded his forces in Lebanon.
Halutz accused Ron-Tal, who has been on paid leave pending his retirement
for the past seven months, of bringing politics into the IDF for his statement
that the IDF's single-minded devotion to the government's controversial
political program harmed its war-fighting capabilities, and for his call
for Halutz and Olmert to resign. Yet, during his tenure as Chief of Staff,
Halutz has been slavish in his public devotion to the government's political
preference for using the IDF to fight the Israeli residents of Judea, Samaria
and Gaza over preparing for war against Israel's enemies.
Any objective observer of the developments in our region understands
that the storm of war is rapidly approaching us. With Moscow's blessing,
the Palestinians, Hizbullah, Syria and Iran are steadfastly preparing for
battle.
There is no doubt that Israel can weather the coming storm. But to do
this, we must have political and military leaders who are willing to recognize
its inexorable approach.
JWR contributor Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow
at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing
editor of The Jerusalem Post.
Russian version