http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/world/middleeast/syria-israel.html?ref=middleeast&_r=0
The article I found discusses the issue of an Israeli airstrike near the Syrian Capitol of Damascus. The strike took place in the outskirts of Damascus and American intelligence says that it was carried out on a convoy carrying sophisticated anti-aircraft defense systems intended for Hezbollah in Lebanon. Syria does not admit to the attack being on a convoy but says rather that the attack was carried out on a scientific research facility in the suburbs of Damascus. Surrounding countries have taken their stands on the attack already, Russia continues its plead for a political solution to be found and "The unacceptability of external intervention". Both Iran and Hezbollah have fully backed Syria, saying that the Israeli attack was "flagrant aggression" with an end goal of "undermining stability and calmness in the country". Israel reportedly informed the U.S. of the attack and claimed the purpose was to make sure that Hezbollah is unable to take advantage of the chaos in Syria at the moment to bolster their own defenses. But when questioned by the public Israel denied the airstrike. analysts of the situation say that while retaliation may seem immanent, the reality is that neither Syria or Hezbollah have enough invested interests in a response attack to warrant its happening. Israel had made it clear to Syrian officials that if they felt Syria had lost its control over its chemical weapons or given control to Hezbollah then they would feel compelled to act. Apparently Israeli intelligence didn't like what they saw and made a move.
No comments:
Post a Comment