Israel and the Arab spring

John Rapley, Contributor 

The Arab spring, whose name is apt owing to the hotter temperatures it is carrying on its winds, advances deeper into the Middle East. It would have been an intrepid soul who would have predicted that Syria, one of the world's most ruthlessly efficient dictatorships, would find itself roiled by a citizen uprising.

But the other day, while watching The Fighter, the film about the Irish-American boxer Micky Ward, I was given to some reflections on the nature of violent battle. Ward was a heart fighter: someone whose skill and technical ability were not extraordinary, but whose capacity to absorb punishment made him a fearsome opponent.

Because here's the thing (and yes, I am coming back to the Arab spring): victory in a fight is determined only partially by who can deliver the most damage. As important in deciding its outcome, is who is willing or able to accept the most damage. In the intuitive calculation which goes into deciding who to target, the predator will naturally seek the prey which falls most easily.

Immune to fear

So Syria, which has long kept its people in line through psychopathically imagined techniques of breaking the human body, and which has maintained a network of spies that has socialised its people into always looking over their shoulders, may just have overplayed its hand. A people grown inured to pain may not fear it so much.

What, then, does Israel make of all this? Normally, one might assume that a state like Israel would regard the travails of its enemy with quiet satisfaction. Not only is Syria officially still at war with Israel, but it condemns the peace deals which other Arab governments have struck with the Jewish state and sponsors some of its internal foes. Moreover, for all its flaws, Israel remains a democratic state with an institutional adherence to basic human rights. Surely, one would be forgiven of concluding, it will look kindly on the spread of democracy through its hostile neighbourhood.

That is where the sequence breaks down. While there is literature in international-relations theory which postulates that democracies prefer one another's company, because they are less likely to go to war with one another, Israel probably regards the democratic wave with some misgiving. It's a case of better the devil you know.

The devil you know

Syria may be a foe, but it is a known foe. Officially at war, it hasn't actually fought Israel in nearly 40 years. Meanwhile, its harsh repression has been used to keep down Islamist enemies within its own borders. Given a choice, Israel would rather contend with a pragmatic if brutal regime, than an ideologically driven one.

Because an ideologically driven regime is like a heart fighter. When you're lining up heavenly virgins, thoughts of survival remain rather far from one's mind. It is not so easy to intimidate such an opponent with threats of force - the one thing Israel, with its historically superior fighting force, has been able to muster against its neighbours.

The outcome of the Arab spring remains uncertain. It is not yet clear that a uniform turn to political Islam will result. In some countries, like Egypt, there are signs the rising influence of political Islam is leading to self-discipline in its ranks. In Yemen, where Islamists are already present in the state, the damage may already be done.

But Syria is certainly a worry to Israel. The sudden turn of events appears to be reigniting the push for the recognition of a Palestinian state by September. However, the present Israeli government, which has put peace talks on hold, seems to have been caught off guard. Unprepared for such an eventuality, it finds itself in the uncomfortable position of watching events it cannot control, but no doubt wishes it could. And all this, while hoping Osama wannabes don't turn up on its doorstep.

John Rapley is the Bradlow fellow at the South African Institute of International Affairs. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and rapley.john@gmail.com.