The two camps seem to be uncompromising and are headed to further conflict. The instability lies in the large number of countries involved as well as non state actors wielding real power (Hezbollah, Hamas, Settlers) that are not in the negotiation loop. The Cuba Crisis was diffused because just two state actors decided to deal. Consider the following scenario. An incident is ?staged? on the Lebanese border that initiates a limited retaliation by Israel. Hezbollah escalates and hits back forcing Israel to retaliate with more force. Further escalation leads to missiles on IAF airfields, Tel Aviv and Ben Gurion Airport. Israeli reaction gets Syria involved that attacks Dimona nuclear facility. Settlers, out of control, blow up Al Aksa and the Dome of the Rock. Jordan and Egypt annul peace accord and mobilise. In the panic, with missile reigning down on Tel Aviv, settlers instigate ethnic cleansing forcing Palestinians out the West Bank and into Jordan. IAF bombs Damascus, Iran attacks Israel, US attacks Iran, Iran closes Hormuz Strait, China starts shooting down US military satellites and paralyses operations by cyber attack. The world witnesses the second hostile nuclear event, etc. etc. Everyone looses, very similar to Europe 1914 but with more fire power and no central front line. Contingency plans anyone?
U.S. says working on initiative to de-escalate Syria fighting, with focus on Aleppo (Reuters)
from the article: Biden to Israelis: Mideast status quo unsustainable
The explosive dilemma of 'collaboration' with the Nazis in order to save German Jews split the Zionist movement in the 1930s.00:01 01.05.16 | 1 comments