By Husam Dughman
Following the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria and the takeover of the country by rebels led by Hay’at Tahrir Ash-Sham, or HTS, Israel has launched extensive air strikes against a number of sites in Syria perceived to be storing lethal chemical and conventional weapons, as well as ones that were suspected of being research centres for the development of weapons of mass destruction. Israel has justified its attacks by claiming that it fears those sophisticated weapons could end up very soon in the hands of the victorious rebels many of whom were, not so long ago, directly affiliated with Al-Qaeda.
Curiously, Israel has now been accused by a Spanish political figure of committing acts of genocide in Syria. Ione Belarra, leader of the Podemos party, has recently said that Israel’s aforementioned attacks constitute a case of genocide. What is next? Claiming that pests like mosquitos, cockroaches, and bedbugs in Israel are the victims of acts of genocide perpetrated by the Jewish state? Various countries, some employees of the UN, and some of those who are affiliated with that body have also been vocal in condemning Israel for attacking Syria’s sophisticated weaponry following the downfall of the Assad dynasty. The question now is: Was Israel justified in attacking the above-mentioned Syrian sites?
In the modern world, the ABC of international politics advises that you never, ever allow an inimical force, especially one that is hell-bent on your annihilation, to get so close to you that it can actually destroy you. In the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK stood his ground against Khruschev’s placement of Soviet missiles on Cuban soil. The Americans reckoned that that was too close for comfort. They were right. Likewise, and in spite one’s reservations about the nature of today’s Russian politics, one can understand why the Russians do not want Ukraine, or any other country with shared borders with Russia for that matter, to join NATO. Just like the Americans back in 1962 felt gravely threatened by the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba, the Russians of today cannot possibly accept Ukraine as a NATO member, something which would easily allow that military organization to place some of its deadliest weapons right next door to Russia. One has to remind oneself that this is a country that had faced three unprovoked, massive attacks against it by Western countries in the last two centuries or so, once by Napoleon’s France, and twice by Germany, the last invasion of which cost Russians (and other Soviets) tens of millions of dead.
One would do well to recall that in 1940, the British were determined to prevent the Germans from taking advantage of the powerful French navy that had effectively fallen into their hands following Germany’s stunning conquest of France in that year. Winston Churchill was sceptical of assurances given by some German and French political and military figures concerning a commitment supposedly made by Germany and Vichy France to the effect that the French navy would not be used against Britain. The British later sank much of that navy at Mers-el-Kébir in Algeria, a decision that allegedly broke Churchill’s heart, but one that he felt was nevertheless necessary for Britian’s survival in World War II. The number of French deaths in the said attack was reportedly over one thousand men. That episode led to a considerable increase in French resentment towards the British, both at the popular and political levels. Churchill’s relations with the leader of the Free French Forces back then, Charles De Gaulle, soured as a result. Nevertheless, America’s president at that time, Franklin D. Roosevelt, is said to have told the French ambassador that he would have done the same thing as Churchill had he been in his shoes.
Israel is not new to the world of pre-emptive strikes. Back in 1967, Nasser, who was then the president of Egypt, took a number of foolish steps against Israel, each of which could potentially have been considered a casus belli: He closed off the economically important Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping, he told the UN’s peacekeeping forces to move out of the way from their positions separating Egyptian and Israeli forces as a result of the 1956 Suez Crisis, and he massed his army units along Egypt’s border with Israel. It was then that Israel made the decision to attack the Egyptians and their allies, namely the Syrians, the Jordanians, and the Iraqis, something which- against all expectations- led to a breathtaking Israeli victory in merely six days. Nevertheless, that astonishing feat may not have been as entirely beneficial for the Jewish state as one would have imagined. They say, “Pride comes before a fall.” Drunk with their intoxicating six-day triumph of 1967, the Israelis started to become complacent. Their sharp focus and tip-top perceptiveness of yore began to lapse. They started to slip. Badly. A rude awakening occurred on the 6th of October 1973 when Arabic-speaking countries led by Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack against Israel. It was a sobering experience, or so it should have been. Tragically, Israel stumbled and fell again on the 7th of October 2023. By that time, the Israelis had mind-bogglingly given Iran all the time in the world to tighten its noose around their necks through proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah, two terrorist organizations which were, shockingly, left alone to build themselves up over the years to a point where they became capable of inflicting huge damage on the Jewish state. Not anymore.
If there is a great lesson to be learned from Israel’s failure on the 7th of October 2023, it is to never, ever trust people who are intent on its annihilation. Israel’s nonchalant attitude towards its sworn enemies prior to the October the 7th massacre now appears to be gone for good. That is the main reason why the Jewish state has lately launched intensive air campaigns aimed at the destruction of as many Syrian chemical and conventional weapons, as well as weapon research centres, as possible. Israel cannot allow Al-Qaeda affiliates to take possession of lethal weapons which could be used to kill countless Israelis. For a similar reason, the Israelis cannot permit the new governors of Syria to occupy the deserted Syrian part of the buffer zone existing between Israel and Syria, an area that is the result of the 1974 separation-of-forces agreement, given that those rebels have an Al-Qaeda and an Islamic State group background. Yet, once again, people who criticize Israel for taking absolutely necessary precautions to protect its population from a potential genocide by diehard Islamists fall into the trap of hypocrisy when- among other things- they fail to condemn Turkey for occupying a much larger chunk of Syria than Israel has done, and with a far less convincing justification than Israel’s.
The fact remains that Israel has never committed acts of genocide against any people in the world. Rather, it is some nations and peoples around that same world who have been trying very hard for 2000 years to commit acts of genocide against the Jews. Israel has every right to fight against the enemies of civilization, liberty, and justice, be they genocidal Islamists, hateful neo-Nazis, or deluded leftist wokers. What the Jews in general, and the Israelis in particular, have been facing recently is a combination of intellectual Nazism and psychological terrorism presented as benevolent humanism.
…………………………………………………………………………………….
About the author
Husam Dughman is a Libyan Canadian political scientist, religious thinker, linguist, and an expert on immigrants and refugees. He received his formal education in Libya and the UK. Mr. Dughman later worked as a university professor of political science in Libya. Due to confrontations with the Qaddafi regime, he resigned from his university position and subsequently worked in legal translation. Mr. Dughman has been working with new immigrant and refugee services in both Canada and the US since 2006.
Husam Dughman has published a book entitled Tête-à-tête with Muhammad. He has also written numerous articles on politics and religion. He has just completed the full manuscript of a book which he hopes to have published in the near future. The new book is an in-depth examination of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and the non-religious school of thought.
