(Israel Government Press Office)
Three papers discuss the implications of a possible US attack on Syria in the wake of Wednesday's chemical weapons attack on rebels near Damascus:
Ma'ariv says: "Up until now, Assad has thumbed his nose at the red line [enunciated by Us President Obama last summer] on the assumption that the US is not really interested in acting against him," but adds: "Over the weekend, it seemed that the pictures that were broadcast around the world have not left the US any choice but to act in some way," even without a UN Security Council endorsement. The author believes that "Any attack on Syrian soil is liable to lead to firing at Israel in response. Assad will try to attack Israel especially if he feels that his regime is in tangible danger. And yes, he would be liable to launch chemical weapons at us."
Yediot Aharonot suggests that "The likelihood that Syria would respond against Israel if it is attacked by the US is not high, but in the Middle East logic is not always in control," and adds: "If Syria's national honor is hurt as a result of an American attack, the Syrian response is liable to be irrational." The author says that the Syrians "have forced President Obama to make decisions he would rather not make – but has to," and claims: "He must restore the world's confidence in general, and that of the Middle East in particular, in the US while minimizing the risk to US forces and interests." The author concludes: "One can only hope that if the Americans do decide to attack, they will inform us several hours in advance so that we might prepare for the possibility that the Syrians will go nuts."
Yisrael Hayom asserts: "In Israel it is believed that at least in the first stage, any American attack is expected to be limited and focused (perhaps against the forces that operated the chemical weapons), both in order to avoid a military entanglement and out of concern that a broad assault would prod Assad into using non-conventional weapons against his opponents (out of a sense that he has nothing to lose)." The author avers: "From Israel's point-of-view, the challenge will be to remain outside the picture. The natural concern is that with its back to the wall, Syria (or Hezbollah and Iran) would be liable to direct their fire at us as well in order to complicate things or unite the Arab world against us. Thus it is likely that there will be close coordination between Jerusalem and Washington, including American guarantees to protect Israel should it be attacked (as was the case during the first Gulf War)." Given events elsewhere in the region, the paper urges the US, Europe and Israel to think about the situation that might prevail in Syria after the fall of the Assad regime.
==========================================
The Jerusalem Post comments on the end phase of the Wings of the Dove operation that brought the last remaining Jews in Ethiopia to Israel, and states: “The government must support the growing Ethiopian- Jewish community here, speed up the process of conversion for the new Falash Mura immigrants and invest in job skills training and education programs.”
Haaretz comments on statements by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to a Meretz party delegation last week, and declares: “Abbas has proven he's a partner for peace.” The editor states: “With a series of important, courageous statements, Mahmoud Abbas has made clear that the Palestinians have a pragmatic leader who is offering Israel a chance not to be missed,” and concludes: “Today there is a unique opportunity to reach a historic agreement.”
[Amir Rappaport, Alex Fishman and Yoav Limor wrote today’s articles in Ma'ariv, Yediot Aharonot and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]