Oh, Those Tricky Syrians!

Looks like our friends in Syria have started looking for innovative ways to further their cause, while trying to make nice with President Bush. Buried deep in this article is a prime example of the Syrians trying to pull a fast one on Israel.

The Syrian Foreign Minister is proposing a treaty, that Syria would sponsor and sign, to make the Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. Liberal commentators, the news media, and most of the folks against a war in Syria have been latching on to this as proof of Baby Assad's "reasonableness" and his "willingness to negotiate for peace." Now I'm still not ready to support a side trip to Damascus for the Fourth Infantry Division, but this is not anything like what it is being described as.

There are really only three countries that would matter in this treaty plan: Syria, Lebanon, and Israel. Should the treaty be proposed, Syria will sign it and give up their WMD - publicly at least - just like they have stated. Lebanon, run by a Syrian puppet regime, will decline to sign the treaty. And Israel will end up screwed either way.

But why would Lebanon refuse to sign on to a treaty that would supposedly make their nation safer? Being between two WMD armed powers that really don't like each other isn't too good for the long-term health after all. Remember, Lebanon is a proxy for Syria. If the Lebanese don't sign the treaty, Syria wins on two levels. First they can trumpet the Lebanese decision as proof that Syria doesn't run Lebanon. After all, this is proof that the Lebanese government can make decision in opposition to that of Damascus and all will still be well. Secondly, Syria will make a big show of destroying a few obsolete WMD, mainly for the Western media, but where do you think the remaining, modernized stock will go? I'm guessing it would head into Lebanon, the non-signatory state.

All of which would leave Syria collecting massive liberal brownie points for voluntarily disarming and for proving once and for all that they don't rule Lebanon by fiat. So what are Israel's choices like?

If Israel chooses to sign on to the treaty, the Western media and Western governments will force them to comply with the treaty. Meaning Israel will have to voluntarily disarm. Now Israel being Israel, they will still have the Western elitists whining at them for not having unilaterally disarmed, without the need for a treaty or for Syria to disarm, and they will still have a non-conventional weapons threat right on their doorstep. So by signing the treaty, Israel would not gain anything, but would lose a strong deterrent against a WMD attack.

But Israel can't refuse to sign it either. The whining and gnashing of teeth will be bad enough if they do sign, if they don't sign the spin could make the Nazis look like they were running a peace rally. Israel would be raked over the coals and crucified in the court of world opinion. And all that would happen strategically is that Syria could then back out of the treaty with no loss of face.

This treaty is a really devious and well-designed attempt to subvert Israel's support in the world community. There is no way for Israel to benefit from this treaty - either by signing it or refusing to do so. Israel is in a lose-lose situation if this treaty really comes into play.

Syria on the other hand is in a win-win. They get to keep their WMD - most likely through a proxy government - and they get to watch their arch-nemesis suffer the wrath of unreasonable and uninformed public opinion. And they get to propagandize their support for "a peaceful settlement" to the problems of the Middle East -something the Western elite will eat up without ever questioning.

Israel can't win; Syria can't lose. Is it any wonder the Syrians came up with this brilliant plan?