Approaching the end of 1996, the Middle East may well be on the verge of a major regional war. The supreme leaders in most Arab states, as well as in Iran and Pakistan are convinced that the present vulnerability of Israel is so great that there is a unique opportunity to begin the process leading to the destruction of Israel. These circumstances are considered to be a historic window of opportunity the Muslim World should not miss. Therefore, these Muslim leaders have finalized numerous strategies and tactical alliances heretofore non-existent in the region. Several Arab states, as well as Iran and Pakistan, have been engaged in a frantic military build-up and active preparations in the last few months. 

When analyzing these unfolding developments, it is highly significant to recall the emerging mega-trends in the Middle East: The rise of militant Islam as the primary motivating factor of the Arab public has already reached unprecedented levels. The present leaders of Iran, Syria and Iraq are determined to transfer power to their sons-and-heirs. The succession struggle in Saudi Arabia is peaking. These mega-trends are pushing toward a crisis environment. A dramatic breakout from the deadlock is virtually inevitable. The latest developments in the military threat to Israel fit perfectly into this overall trend. 
 
 

Specific military moves at the national-strategic level suggesting active preparations for a possible war in the near future began in the spring of 1996. These activities range from highly irregular and highly significant military exercises to political and international agreements. 

Starting mid August, the Syrian Armed Forces have conducted a series of redeployments and maneuvers that have direct implications for their ability to launch an attack on Israel. The concurrent activities of both the Iraqi Armed Forces and PLO forces in Lebanon also contribute to the enhancement of the Arab military capabilities against Israel. Meanwhile, Iran has delivered, via Syria, a whole range of vastly improved weapons to the HizbAllah and other terrorist forces based on the border with Israel. Tens of flights delivered military equipment and highly specialized systems for Syrian and HizbAllah units.

The nuclear factor has become a crucial element in any conflict in the Middle East. Iran has nuclear weapons and so does Pakistan. The supreme leaders in Tehran are convinced that the numerous warheads purchased from the former Soviet Central Asia are operational. Irrespective of skeptic "expert opinion" in the West, the decision-makers in Tehran operate on the basis of their own conviction that Iran has operational nuclear weapons. Moreover, there are indications of a Pakistani agreement, with Chinese consent, to "contribute" to the Muslim nuclear deterrence. And there is no doubt that Pakistan has operational nuclear weapons. 

The Arabs have a well defined nuclear doctrine they believe in effect neutralizes Israel's "deterrence factor" at the very least for the strategically crucial initial period of war -- the time frame in which the Arab-Iranian forces manage their strategic grab, while the Israeli government agonizes over the decision how to react to the nuclear ultimatum and the sudden war. Moreover, the Arabs and the Iranians are convinced they can also deter an American cover for Israel. 

The Syrians and their allies have well defined contingency plans. The basic Syrian approach to a major war is based on the contingency plans prepared and exercised for the war that almost erupted in the Fall of 1992, while the plans for a strategic grab in a limited war are based on contingency plans prepared in 1994 and exercised since then. The latest changes in Syrian military deployment fit the prerequisites of these contingency plans. 

When dealing with the Middle East, one should leave the "Crystal Ball" under lock and key. However, it is possible to point out to emerging and dominant trends in the crisis management. Arab leaders are convinced that a major brinkmanship crisis, the return to a no-war-no-peace tense situation, even the resumption of limited clashes, are a must to their own survival. Their undertaking of these steps means that they are fully ready to meet the possibility of a major war. 

One reason for the readiness to face war, as opposed to the reluctance shown previously, is the Muslim World's conviction that Israel is falling apart. Considering the building Islamist pressure to destroy Israel under any conditions, the Arab and Iranian leaders who are determined to hold on to power may find these circumstances too tempting to be passed over. 

Meanwhile, on a more pragmatic and realistic level, the fear of Israel's military might has shrunk and this factor is high on the leaders' mind. This newly found Arab sense of self-confidence and the firm belief in the ability to succeed in the initial phase of a war creates a new and worrisome framework within which these leaders examine the choices ahead of them. 

Further more, at the higher political levels of the entire Arab World and most significantly in capitals considered relatively supportive of the "peace process," there is more hostile and confrontational attitude toward Israel -- declaring a state of "cold war" between Israel and its Arab partners, and calls for the pursuit of policies of "armed peace" and even "confrontational peace" toward Israel. 

Taken together, the multitude of political, strategic and tactical moves leave no doubt that the key leaders in the Arab World and Iran have already determined to continue the escalatory brinkmanship even as the likelihood of war is growing. They are now preoccupied mainly with strategic and military decisions -- that is, determining the optimal conditions for initiating the war, achieving surprise despite the protracted escalatory crisis and Israel's edginess, etc. 

However, there is no hard evidence, yet, of a specific decision to start something on a fixed date. Presently, the prevailing mood among the political, military and security elites in the Arab World is that of an almost passive, though willing, acceptance of fate's course. As the region continues to deteriorate towards an eruption of violence, they are waiting for the inevitable spark to emerge and "compel" them into taking action. Among the supreme leaders that really count, the "straw" seems to be still missing. But for how long?

Copyright © January 1997-2004
All Rights Reserved.
Our e-mail is: ortzion@ortzion.org