There's much talk these days about partition and fragmentation projects in the Arab region, especially in Syria. Some powers, led by Israel, are openly working to divide what's divided and fragment what's already fragmented, making it easier for them to devour the region or subjugate it, according to Israeli plans and projects, among others. Some believe that the Sykes-Picot maps have outlived their usefulness after a century, and that new maps are needed to suit the next phase. This is no longer a secret; in fact, it has been circulating in the media for decades.
We may recall the Israeli "Kivunim" document issued in 1982, which openly discusses the division of several Arab countries, including Syria, into weak states that would be unable to confront Israel in the future. Most of us have heard of the American "Blood Maps," which follow the same Israeli approach.
Ralph Peters, a colonel in the US Army, published a book entitled "Blood Borders," which focuses on the partition project developed by Bernard Lewis. Israeli intentions have returned to the spotlight once again after the fall of the Syrian regime and the liberation of Syria. The Israeli army began destroying all Syrian military sites and seizing new areas of Syrian territory, while Netanyahu threatened the new leadership in Damascus with retaliation if it sent its forces into southern Syria. He wants the south demilitarized, and even loudly claimed that he wanted to protect the Druze in the south and would not allow anyone to attack them.
There is no doubt that everyone knows that Israel has never been a charitable organization. Rather, it has long-standing projects it wants to implement today, and it uses flimsy claims to advance these plans to throw dust in the eyes and mock the beards.
One analyst from the heart of Jerusalem described the Israeli project in southern Syria as akin to a bear's hug, and we all know that if a bear hugs someone, it will surely break their ribs. This is what awaits anyone in Syria, from east to west and from north to south, who believes Israeli claims and promises.
But the question today, in light of the announced plans for division and fragmentation, is: Does division actually serve Tel Aviv, especially in a country as sensitive as Syria, for example? Didn't the famous American political fox, Henry Kissinger, once say that Syria is a "laboratory" for the entire region, and that the results of the Syrian experiment could be reflected throughout the Middle East?
Given that what's happening in Syria could have both positive and negative repercussions for the entire region, is it in anyone's interest, including Israel, for Syria to be divided? Or is anyone considering the fragmentation of Syria shooting themselves in the foot? Even the head of the Syrian regime, who fled to Moscow, realized this fact at the beginning of the Syrian revolution in 2011, when he made a very important statement. Here, we live by the proverb: "Take wisdom from the mouths of fools."
Bashar al-Assad, describing his country's geography and demographics, said that day: "Syria lies on a seismic fault line," warning that any change in Syria would plunge the region into multiple "Afghanistans"...and any division of his country would inevitably lead to the division of the entire region.
It is true that he said this with the aim of frightening both domestically and internationally to preserve his regime. It is true that his words may fall within the framework of a policy of intimidation against a "hundred-year war" between sects, denominations, and ethnicities—the same scarecrow that corrupt and tyrannical regimes have long brandished in the face of the winds of change and forces of reform in the region. However, at the same time, we cannot deny that the fugitive president's words are highly valid, and that any manipulation of the Syrian map could lead to the disintegration of the entire region, including Turkey, Iran, and the rest of the threatened Arab states.
And let's not forget that if Sudan, a long-standing Israeli goal, disintegrates, Egypt will be the next target. In other words, partition in any part of the Middle East will have horrific consequences for the rest of the region. In the case of Syria, the victims are many, including Israel itself, the project's sponsor.
If Syria were to be divided, it would, as Bashar himself described it, be a seismic rift that would affect both those near and far in the region. We do not believe that a continent-like country like Turkey would allow the Israeli plan to succeed. Even if we leave aside the rest of the region's countries threatened by the Syrian fault line, we would find that a unified Syria is far better for Israeli security than a disintegrated, warring, conflicting, and internecine Syria.
Israel lived for more than half a century under the iron grip of the fallen regime, and it was undoubtedly deeply disturbed by its fall because it provided it with protection it had never dreamed of, through its strict control of Syrian geography and its prevention of internal and external access to Israel's borders. Today, if the partition plan succeeds, God forbid, will Israel be immune to its dire security consequences?
Wouldn't Syria become the preferred destination for anyone seeking to settle scores with Israel? Everyone will come to Syria to exact revenge on Tel Aviv, and there is no doubt that such a catastrophic scenario is not far from Israeli strategists' minds as they consider dividing Syria and spreading chaos throughout it.
Therefore, preserving Syrian geography in its current form, or developing it administratively, provided it is not divided, would be the optimal option, provided that Syria's geography is not affected and that leadership on the military, security, and external levels remains in one hand.
Perhaps Israel has begun reconsidering its calculations regarding Syria, especially since it suddenly backed down from allowing Syrian workers from the south to work within its territory. If Tel Aviv does not guarantee the security of Syrian workers within its settlements, will it encourage projects of fragmentation, division, and chaos within Syria, with their disastrous effects on Israeli security?
Or is this scenario more unsuitable for Israel than for anyone else? It is in no one's interest in the region to tamper with Syria's territorial integrity, and anyone who plays with Syrian fire will get their fingers burned? In any case, these questions remain mere hypotheses. No one knows exactly what is going on in the dark rooms, which have their own agendas. Let's not forget that the agendas of the Qarya are not the same as those of the Saraya.
Faisal Al-Qasim is a British-Syrian columnist and television personality based in [email protected]
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.